JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Rob Caprio on September 17, 2018, 02:33:12 PM
-
Doesn?t this strike anyone as quite odd? I mean generally if you want to try and get away with a crime I would imagine it would help to do it where NO ONE KNOWS WHO YOU ARE! In 1963 they did NOT have the type of equipment they have now to quickly ID you and track you via GPS and other methods, so if you are unknown this greatly increases your chances of getting away with it! As for the claim of ?Well he wanted to be famous? we have to go by his behavior after he was arrested! Did it strike anyone as wanting to be famous?
Also, the excuse DVP gave me years ago for not committing the crime at Love Field was that he couldn?t get his rifle there without being seen! First of all, he didn?t need ?his? rifle (something I don?t think ever existed by the way) as he could have used a pistol instead and that could have easily been hidden from a cab driver (much better than a bus scenario as again it creates less people who can remember you).
Secondly, don?t you think the SAME logic applies to getting a ride from Wes Frazier and then lugging the rifle two to three blocks to the TSBD and then lugging it around until you hide it in the TSBD for later use? These were people who KNEW you too by sight and in some cases by NAME!
Also, it would seem DP was a much tougher place to get away from. At the airport he could have dropped the gun and disappeared into the crowd and then even got on a flight out of town. This sounds much more plausible than the OFFICIAL scenario to me.
When one adds in the fact LHO was NOT very good with a rifle this would seem to make this the ONLY scenario to me.
What are your thoughts on this?
-
Doesn?t this strike anyone as quite odd?
Not odd in the slightest. There was a degree of luck required for him to succeed (not being challenged over his parcel; being alone by the window etc) but the convenience of the set up was just too good to be true. He had meet his destiny and didn't look back.
-
Rob........John Wilkes Booth
-
At the airport he could have dropped the gun and disappeared into the crowd and then even got on a flight out of town. This sounds much more plausible than the OFFICIAL scenario to me.
Thank you, Rob. That made my day. :)
-
Thank you, Rob. That made my day. :)
No problem Jerry. Why do you think he allegedly used his workplace when he was known there?
-
Rob........John Wilkes Booth
So you think that they just used the same premise?
-
Oswald being known there (TSBD) was the advantage that location had over all others. Isn't that obvious to you?
-
Oswald being known there (TSBD) was the advantage that location had over all others. Isn't that obvious to you?
No, it isn't. Since he never admitted to committing the crime, even when dying, it is not a stretch to think if he committed the shooting then he wanted to get away with it. So again, why would he pick a location where people knew him?
-
LOL. First, there is no getting away with assassinating the president. The act entails arrest or death. Oswald recognized that which is why he left his wedding ring and money with his wife. But if he wanted to at least try to escape what would be better - standing out in the crowd at the airport and shooting JFK in the direct presence of the Secret Service and an angry mob or secluding himself in a building some distance away? Caprio believes that standing out in the open in the presence of a large crowd and secret service detail would have enhanced Oswald's chance of escape! Whew. How did that work out for Sirhan Sirhain, Sqeaky Froamm, John Hinckley, and Leon Czolgosz?
-
LOL. First, there is no getting away with assassinating the president. The act entails arrest or death. Oswald recognized that which is why he left his wedding ring and money with his wife. But if he wanted to at least try to escape what would be better - standing out in the crowd at the airport and shooting JFK in the direct presence of the Secret Service and an angry mob or secluding himself in a building some distance away? Caprio believes that standing out in the open in the presence of a large crowd and secret service detail would have enhanced Oswald's chance of escape! Whew. How did that work out for Sirhan Sirhain, Sqeaky Froamm, John Hinckley, and Leon Czolgosz?
So you believe that he would be "out in the open" at the airport? Why?
-
So you believe that he would be "out in the open" at the airport? Why?
No wonder he can't figure out what year Benavides died.
The cognitive dissonance is beyond belief.
-
Doesn?t this strike anyone as quite odd? I mean generally if you want to try and get away with a crime I would imagine it would help to do it where NO ONE KNOWS WHO YOU ARE! In 1963 they did NOT have the type of equipment they have now to quickly ID you and track you via GPS and other methods, so if you are unknown this greatly increases your chances of getting away with it! As for the claim of ?Well he wanted to be famous? we have to go by his behavior after he was arrested! Did it strike anyone as wanting to be famous?
Also, the excuse DVP gave me years ago for not committing the crime at Love Field was that he couldn?t get his rifle there without being seen! First of all, he didn?t need ?his? rifle (something I don?t think ever existed by the way) as he could have used a pistol instead and that could have easily been hidden from a cab driver (much better than a bus scenario as again it creates less people who can remember you).
Secondly, don?t you think the SAME logic applies to getting a ride from Wes Frazier and then lugging the rifle two to three blocks to the TSBD and then lugging it around until you hide it in the TSBD for later use? These were people who KNEW you too by sight and in some cases by NAME!
Also, it would seem DP was a much tougher place to get away from. At the airport he could have dropped the gun and disappeared into the crowd and then even got on a flight out of town. This sounds much more plausible than the OFFICIAL scenario to me.
When one adds in the fact LHO was NOT very good with a rifle this would seem to make this the ONLY scenario to me.
What are your thoughts on this?
Lee Thought that he was involved in a hoax that was similar to the Walker hoax. He thought that it would appear as though he had attempted to shoot JFK ( just as it appeared that he had attempted to shoot Walker) He WANTED to be identified as the assailant that had "fired at" JFK .
You may recall that Fidel Castro had publicly announced that if high officials in the United States ( Meaning JFK) were plotting his assassination then they themselves should be prepared to be assassinated...
Since Lee thought that Castro would be happy with a fellow "communist revolutionary" who had attempted to assassinate JFK , Lee thought that the attempt to shoot JFK would be his ticket to infiltrate Castro's island Bastion.
Thus he welcomed the "evidence" that supported that plot..... He wanted the attempt to occur near his place of employment...( the TSBD) and he wanted the carcano to be found in the building ....
He was simply too trusting and naive to realize that there was another plot to actually murder JFK while he was being duped into the hoax scenario.
-
So you believe that he would be "out in the open" at the airport? Why?
Down the rabbit hole we go. Let's see. Maybe because you suggested that Oswald would shoot JFK with a pistol. That entails getting fairly close to him. Within a few feet. How would he have done that at Love Field from any place accessible to the public without being "out in the open." Seemingly the only opportunity to shoot JFK with a pistol at Love Field would be to stand among the crowd as JFK shook hands with people. How about you explain it though since this is your nutty premise?
-
Would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic and sad.
-
Speaking of pathetic and sad:
Oswald wanted to be famous and expected to be caught and arrested. That's why he tried to escape and denied doing it.
-
No wonder he can't figure out what year Benavides died.
The cognitive dissonance is beyond belief.
So this means that you have NO answer. No surprise there.
-
Down the rabbit hole we go. Let's see. Maybe because you suggested that Oswald would shoot JFK with a pistol. That entails getting fairly close to him. Within a few feet. How would he have done that at Love Field from any place accessible to the public without being "out in the open." Seemingly the only opportunity to shoot JFK with a pistol at Love Field would be to stand among the crowd as JFK shook hands with people. How about you explain it though since this is your nutty premise?
Just off the top of my head -- at the fence and there were a lot of people there so he wouldn't be "out in the open" as you claimed. This is exactly the scenario that JFK himself said to Jackie the morning of the assassination.
He never mentioned anything about a person with a high powered rifle from a tall building as was claimed.
-
Speaking of pathetic and sad:
Oswald wanted to be famous and expected to be caught and arrested. That's why he tried to escape and denied doing it.
His escape also supposedly included getting on a bus that was headed back to DP. Talk about funny.
-
Speaking of pathetic and sad:
Oswald wanted to be famous and expected to be caught and arrested. That's why he tried to escape and denied doing it.
Oswald's rifle, LOL
FIFY
-
Just off the top of my head -- at the fence and there were a lot of people there so he wouldn't be "out in the open" as you claimed. This is exactly the scenario that JFK himself said to Jackie the morning of the assassination.
He never mentioned anything about a person with a high powered rifle from a tall building as was claimed.
Are you saying that standing at the fence line at Love Field is not out in the open because a lot of people were around? Wasn't that outside as "in the open"? Oswald's escape plan was to shoot JFK with a pistol amidst a large crowd and in the direct presence of the secret service? What exactly was he going to do to escape at that point? He wouldn't have made it six inches after firing the shots under those conditions.
-
Carpio, exposing you is way too easy. Simply asking you what year Benavides died gets the job done every time.
The latest "So you believe that he would be "out in the open" at the airport? Why?
" knee slapper is just another one of your seemingly endless laughable displays of lack of cognitive ability.
Keep the classics coming, Carp.
-
FIFY
Says the guy who thinks that "similar order blanks" somehow prove that C2766 was Oswald's rifle.
-
Because Ruth Paine helped him secure a job there and of course the parade route would be changed so LHO could "Patsy" on up and the conspirators could put the crosshairs on JFK and do the Triangularization of shots on JFK while LHO was in the break area . Oswald said he was a Patsy but apparently Ruby knew better, or did he ?
-
Are you saying that standing at the fence line at Love Field is not out in the open because a lot of people were around? Wasn't that outside as "in the open"? Oswald's escape plan was to shoot JFK with a pistol amidst a large crowd and in the direct presence of the secret service? What exactly was he going to do to escape at that point? He wouldn't have made it six inches after firing the shots under those conditions.
It isn't "out in the open" as the shooter would have been surrounded and shielded from return fire, and possible identification, since it would have happened quickly.
So you are saying that the SS would have fired into the crowd? I highly doubt that. This is how true lone assassins carry out their plan. There was not a single incident involving a rifle before 11/22/63 in regards to a POTUS.
-
Carpio, exposing you is way too easy. Simply asking you what year Benavides died gets the job done every time.
The latest "So you believe that he would be "out in the open" at the airport? Why?
" knee slapper is just another one of your seemingly endless laughable displays of lack of cognitive ability.
Keep the classics coming, Carp.
Geek continues to show his total failure to comprehend anything past a third grade level. There was a large crowd at the airport so why would LHO be "out in the open?" Please elaborate.
-
Because Ruth Paine helped him secure a job there and of course the parade route would be changed so LHO could "Patsy" on up and the conspirators could put the crosshairs on JFK and do the Triangularization of shots on JFK while LHO was in the break area . Oswald said he was a Patsy but apparently Ruby knew better, or did he ?
Exactly Mike. From a conspiracy point of view it makes sense, but from a single assassin's point of view who worked there it makes NO sense.
-
I don't think Oswald wanted to be famous, as in known by everyone, but wanted to 'be someone' in his own head. I think he was a frustrated person who thought, if only he was given the chance, he could be someone and make a difference. He had fantasies of being a political warrior, striking a blow for world communism and in particular to support his hero, Fidel Castro, and for Cuba who he felt Kennedy was threatening. When he found out that the Motorcade was passing by his place of work then he took this as his moment to fulfill his fantasy. I don't think he fully thought it through, nor had he planned it in detail, so his action aren't logical but instinctive, including his actions after the event. I think he wanted to get away with it but I think he soon realised he couldn't - maybe from the moment he was confronted by Marion Baker. Once arrested he would ave tried, in my view, to continue to get away with it, denying it as he did and would have loved it to go to trial where he could have put across his political views to a world wide audience.
This is of course speculation on my part and contains lots of 'I thinks' but just adding my thoughts - I don't claim them as facts.
-
Says the guy who thinks that "similar order blanks" somehow prove that C2766 was Oswald's rifle.
Says the troll that insists there is no real evidence C2766 was ordered, paid for, and possessed by Saint Patsy. Because, you know, the similar order forms that were found might have belonged to Ruth Paine or been planted, and therefore aren't real evidence. :D :D
"Oswald's rifle, LOL"
-
Geek continues to show his total failure to comprehend anything past a third grade level. There was a large crowd at the airport so why would LHO be "out in the open?" Please elaborate.
Because the crowd at the airport was 'out in the open', duh.
'Out in the open' as opposed to concealed on the 6th floor of an office building, duh.
I know you think it would be easy for Saint Patsy to get right next to JFK in the airport crowd, shoot him and then simply run away, but that's only because you've watched the movie Taxi Driver too many times.
Saint Patsy could have gone out to the airport and tried shooting JFK at Love Field, but he also had no way of knowing that JFK would stop to shake hands with the greeting crowd.
So instead he waited for JFK to come to him. That was a sure thing.
Worked out pretty well for Saint Patsy, not so much for JFK.
What year did Benavides die ?
-
It isn't "out in the open" as the shooter would have been surrounded and shielded from return fire, and possible identification, since it would have happened quickly.
So you are saying that the SS would have fired into the crowd? I highly doubt that. This is how true lone assassins carry out their plan. There was not a single incident involving a rifle before 11/22/63 in regards to a POTUS.
There have been similar incidents. So we don't have to guess. The shooter is typically grabbed by someone in the crowed and subdued. Think John Hinckley, Sirhan, Squeaky Froamme. There is no escape in that scenario. Oswald would have been subdued in a matter of seconds. No conspirator had ever attempted to kill the president with a rifle before 11.22. So I guess under your rationale there was no conspiracy. In fact, the only conclusion that could be drawn from that line of thought is that JFK was not assassinated by anyone because no one had previously attempted to assassinate the president with a rifle. That is idiotic. No one crashed an airplane into a building before 9/11. That isn't proof that the hijackers were innocent. They recognized a vulnerability and exploited it. In retrospect it is easy to see the risk of the president driving in an open car on a pre-announced route. Sooner or later some nut was going to take advantage of that. Your hero Oswald just thought of it first.
-
I don't think Oswald wanted to be famous, as in known by everyone, but wanted to 'be someone' in his own head. I think he was a frustrated person who thought, if only he was given the chance, he could be someone and make a difference. He had fantasies of being a political warrior, striking a blow for world communism and in particular to support his hero, Fidel Castro, and for Cuba who he felt Kennedy was threatening. When he found out that the Motorcade was passing by his place of work then he took this as his moment to fulfill his fantasy. I don't think he fully thought it through, nor had he planned it in detail, so his action aren't logical but instinctive, including his actions after the event. I think he wanted to get away with it but I think he soon realised he couldn't - maybe from the moment he was confronted by Marion Baker. Once arrested he would ave tried, in my view, to continue to get away with it, denying it as he did and would have loved it to go to trial where he could have put across his political views to a world wide audience.
This is of course speculation on my part and contains lots of 'I thinks' but just adding my thoughts - I don't claim them as facts.
So you have no idea why he would allegedly use his own workplace where he was known.
-
Because the crowd at the airport was 'out in the open', duh.
'Out in the open' as opposed to concealed on the 6th floor of an office building, duh.
I know you think it would be easy for Saint Patsy to get right next to JFK in the airport crowd, shoot him and then simply run away, but that's only because you've watched the movie Taxi Driver too many times.
Saint Patsy could have gone out to the airport and tried shooting JFK at Love Field, but he also had no way of knowing that JFK would stop to shake hands with the greeting crowd.
So instead he waited for JFK to come to him. That was a sure thing.
Worked out pretty well for Saint Patsy, not so much for JFK.
What year did Benavides die ?
So being surrounded by people equals "out in the open" to you. No wonder you are clueless about this case.
-
So you have no idea why he would allegedly use his own workplace where he was known.
Oswald knew that by committing the crime he would be arrested or killed. There was no getting away with assassinating the president. They only way he avoids detection is by not committing the act. Oswald realized this as evidenced by his leaving his wedding ring and money with his wife that morning. He doesn't care if he is "known" at his workplace. He needs a location to fire the shot and the TSBD was ideal. In fact, being "known" at his workplace worked to his advantage in that he could freely move about the building without drawing attention. And it aided in his escape from the building when Baker noticed him. If he had not been an employee that Truly could vouch for at that point, that is likely the end of the road for him.
-
There have been similar incidents. So we don't have to guess. The shooter is typically grabbed by someone in the crowed and subdued. Think John Hinckley, Sirhan, Squeaky Froamme. There is no escape in that scenario. Oswald would have been subdued in a matter of seconds. No conspirator had ever attempted to kill the president with a rifle before 11.22. So I guess under your rationale there was no conspiracy. In fact, the only conclusion that could be drawn from that line of thought is that JFK was not assassinated by anyone because no one had previously attempted to assassinate the president with a rifle. That is idiotic. No one crashed an airplane into a building before 9/11. That isn't proof that the hijackers were innocent. They recognized a vulnerability and exploited it. In retrospect it is easy to see the risk of the president driving in an open car on a pre-announced route. Sooner or later some nut was going to take advantage of that. Your hero Oswald just thought of it first.
You are assuming that he would have been subdued, but you have no way of knowing that he would have been. Everyone's attention would have been on JFK and Jackie not him. There would have been mass confusion. He could have even claimed that the shot came from somewhere over there.
Planes have hit buildings prior to 9/11. No POTUS was ever shot with a rifle before JFK. End of story.
-
Oswald knew that by committing the crime he would be arrested or killed. There was no getting away with assassinating the president. They only way he avoids detection is by not committing the act. Oswald realized this as evidenced by his leaving his wedding ring and money with his wife that morning. He doesn't care if he is "known" at his workplace. He needs a location to fire the shot and the TSBD was ideal. In fact, being "known" at his workplace worked to his advantage in that he could freely move about the building without drawing attention. And it aided in his escape from the building when Baker noticed him. If he had not been an employee that Truly could vouch for at that point, that is likely the end of the road for him.
Sadly for you, there is NO supporting evidence for this fairytale.
-
You are assuming that he would have been subdued, but you have no way of knowing that he would have been. Everyone's attention would have been on JFK and Jackie not him. There would have been mass confusion. He could have even claimed that the shot came from somewhere over there.
Planes have hit buildings prior to 9/11. No POTUS was ever shot with a rifle before JFK. End of story.
Because Oswald did not shoot JFK at Love Field there must be a certain amount of "speculation"about what would have happened. The best we can do is look to other similar examples of an assassin firing at someone from a crowd. Sirhan, Squeaky Froamme, John Hinckley, Arthur Bremer, etc. All apprehended at the scene. But you didn't answer my question. If you are claiming that because no one had used a rifle to kill a president before 11.22 that somehow casts doubts on Oswald's guilt, then why doesn't that same logic apply to your fantasy conspirators? No conspirator had ever used a rifle to assassinate a president before 11.22. Right? So does that mean that no one could have thought of it because it had not previously been done? And that JFK was not assassinated? That is the only conclusion that can be derived from this bizarre line of argument.
-
Says the troll that insists there is no real evidence C2766 was ordered, paid for, and possessed by Saint Patsy. Because, you know, the similar order forms that were found might have belonged to Ruth Paine or been planted, and therefore aren't real evidence.
You forgot to explain how these "similar order forms that were found" demonstrate that Oswald owned C2766.
I'll wait.
:D :D
-
Oswald realized this as evidenced by his leaving his wedding ring and money with his wife that morning.
The only thing that's evidence of is your overactive imagination.
Oswald wanted to be famous and expected to be caught, so he tried to escape and denied doing it. Makes perfect sense.
-
The only thing that's evidence of is your overactive imagination.
Oswald wanted to be famous and expected to be caught, so he tried to escape and denied doing it. Makes perfect sense.
O
Oswald wanted to be famous and expected to be caught, so he tried to escape and denied doing it. Makes perfect sense.
C'mon John.....Don't be so sarcastic..... Mr "Smith" actually believes he's making a rational argument.
-
I'll play along, Trolletti. Just to give you a chance to show the similar order forms were planted, didn't belong to Saint Patsy, and are meaningless.
I never claimed that similar order forms were planted, but I guess you earn your official LN Strawman badge.
Still waiting for you to show that C2766 belonged to Oswald rather than diverting.
-
Because Oswald did not shoot JFK at Love Field there must be a certain amount of "speculation"about what would have happened. The best we can do is look to other similar examples of an assassin firing at someone from a crowd. Sirhan, Squeaky Froamme, John Hinckley, Arthur Bremer, etc. All apprehended at the scene. But you didn't answer my question. If you are claiming that because no one had used a rifle to kill a president before 11.22 that somehow casts doubts on Oswald's guilt, then why doesn't that same logic apply to your fantasy conspirators? No conspirator had ever used a rifle to assassinate a president before 11.22. Right? So does that mean that no one could have thought of it because it had not previously been done? And that JFK was not assassinated? That is the only conclusion that can be derived from this bizarre line of argument.
He also didn't shoot him from the TSBD so that is why you LNers use speculation instead of evidence. When was it proven that Sirhan Sirhan killed RFK?
You said recently in another thread that he had no hope of getting away even in the TSBD, so what's the difference? Why not go for the plan with better odds?
No supposed LN ever used a rifle before in the U.S., but you want us to believe a lousy shot chose a piece of junk rifle to do just that. Sure.
-
It was a good location, but if LHO was the sole assassin he would have known about the floor laying crew working on the sixth floor so why would he choose that floor? The seventh floor had a closet with a door that would have offered much more privacy.
Not to mention deciding to just sit there without making a sound while BRW ate his chicken-on-the-bone sandwich and "Fritos, I believe it was" until about 12:28.
-
Not to mention deciding to just sit there without making a sound while BRW ate his chicken-on-the-bone sandwich and "Fritos, I believe it was" until about 12:28.
Yes, supposedly not making a sound while moving 25-30 cartons and reassembling his alleged rifle. Sure.
-
Not to mention deciding to just sit there without making a sound while BRW ate his chicken-on-the-bone sandwich and "Fritos, I believe it was" until about 12:28.
Seems pretty obvious to me that someone fired shots from there at 12:30.
Speculating that someone was sitting there not making a sound while BRW ate his lunch is just more trolling, whether you think that someone was Saint Patsy or not.
Or are you going to claim there's no evidence shots were fired from there ?
-
Seems pretty obvious to me that someone fired shots from there at 12:30.
I'm sure it does. You just never get around to articulating why.
Speculating that someone was sitting there not making a sound while BRW ate his lunch is just more trolling, whether you think that someone was Saint Patsy or not.
That's your scenario, not mine. Don't blame me -- I'm just following your line of reasoning to its natural conclusion. Unless you want to argue that the gunman rushed into the SE corner and set everything up to shoot in the 1-2 minutes after BRW left.
-
I'm sure it does. You just never get around to articulating why.
That's your scenario, not mine. Don't blame me -- I'm just following your line of reasoning to its natural conclusion. Unless you want to argue that the gunman rushed into the SE corner and set everything up to shoot in the 1-2 minutes after BRW left.
Now Williams is leaving three-to-four minutes closer to the assassination than others claim.
Oswald had all morning to set up the "nest". Mainly he had to move two boxes from about the middle of the floor. The rest had already been moved there (though not necessarily in the stacked placement they were discovered in) by the floor-laying crew. Why not assemble the rifle that morning?
-
Oswald would have to be a complete idiot to be set up as a patsy.
I can't imagine how just one or two people would have set him up. And framing him after the set up would definitely require a lot more than that.
Anyway, although I disagree with you, I want to say I think your posts are always very well written and I like your style.
Oswald would have to be a complete idiot to be set up as a patsy.
Really??..... How difficult would it be to trick a young, naive, kid who fancied himself to be a James Bond ( or a Herb Philbrick) who believed that he was an undercover agent who was working for J. Edgar Hoover , after his handler had told him that this time the hoax would work and he would be allowed to "escape " to Cuba after it appeared that he had fired shots at JFK.
-
Now Williams is leaving three-to-four minutes closer to the assassination than others claim.
Williams didn't go down until he heard Jarman and Norman already on the fifth floor. Jarman said it was "about 12:25 or 12:28" when they took the elevator up. Norman said they stayed out front until they heard that the motorcade was on Main. I believe that announcement was made on the police radio at 12:27.
Oswald had all morning to set up the "nest". Mainly he had to move two boxes from about the middle of the floor. The rest had already been moved there (though not necessarily in the stacked placement they were discovered in) by the floor-laying crew. Why not assemble the rifle that morning?
Wasn't the floor laying crew up there all morning?
-
Oswald would have to be a complete idiot to be set up as a patsy.
.......who believed that he was an undercover agent who was working for J. Edgar Hoover ......
Any actual evidence for this?
-
Any actual evidence for this?
Yes ,but you won't believe it..... You'll accept the lies of LBJ's cover up committe because then you won't have to face the ugly truth.
-
I'm sure it does. You just never get around to articulating why.
That's your scenario, not mine. Don't blame me -- I'm just following your line of reasoning to its natural conclusion. Unless you want to argue that the gunman rushed into the SE corner and set everything up to shoot in the 1-2 minutes after BRW left.
So are you now claiming there's no evidence shots were fired from the SE corner of the TSBD ?
I mean besides the testimony of Euins, Brennan, Jackson, Jarvis, Norman, Williams and the shells found there ?
Is 'Shots fired from the SE corner, LOL' going to be your next troll mantra ?
Because if shots were fired from the SE corner that means that someone 'rushed' there in the time after BRW left.
What's it going to be Trolletti ?
No shots fired from there or someone firing from there after BRW left ? It's one of the two.
Troll.
-
Any actual evidence for this?
His evidence is that he made up a story about it.
Not unlike what the Warren Commission did.
-
His evidence is that he made up a story about it.
Not unlike what the Warren Commission did.
You clearly believe that.
-
I'm sure it does. You just never get around to articulating why.
Just after the President passed by, I heard a shot and several seconds later I heard two more shots. I knew that the shots had come from directly above me, and I could hear the expended cartridges fall to the floor. I also could here the bolt action of the rifle. I saw some dust fall from the ceiling of the fifth floor and I felt sure that whoever had fired the shots was directly above me.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/norman_1.htm
Mr. BALL. Did you notice where did you think the shots came from?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, the first shot-I really did not pay any attention to it, because I did not know what was happening. The second shot, it sounded like it was right in the building, the second and third shot. And it sounded-it even shook the building, the side we were on cement fell on my head.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/williams.htm
Mr. JARMAN - No. He ran up to the police officer and was telling him about the man sticking a gun out the window. And I heard him telling the officer that. And I told him that I thought the shots came from inside, too.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/jarman.htm
(http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/ce480.jpg)
JohnM
-
So are you now claiming there's no evidence shots were fired from the SE corner of the TSBD ?
Shifting the burden fallacy, part umpteen.
I mean besides the testimony of Euins, Brennan, Jackson, Jarvis, Norman, Williams and the shells found there ?
Who's Jarvis? Brennan and Jackson didn't see any shots fired. Why lie? As for Jarman, Norman, and Williams:
Mr. BALL. Did anybody say anything as to where they thought the shots came from?
Mr. NORMAN. Well, I don't recall of either one of them saying they thought where it came from.
Mr. BALL. But You did?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes.
Mr. BALL. And you said you thought it came from where?
Mr. NORMAN. Above where we were, above us.
Well, at least you sort of have Norman. "Above us" somewhere.
Because if shots were fired from the SE corner that means that someone 'rushed' there in the time after BRW left.
If somebody didn't, then by your narrative he or she would have to have been sitting there not making a sound while BRW ate his lunch. It's one or the other.
-
Well, at least you sort of have Norman. "Above us" somewhere.
Norman heard the bolt action and heard the shells hit the floor and what do you know in the window above there was 3 shells and on the same floor a bolt action rifle.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-JbkbBN6KJKE/TZEOJYRVCNI/AAAAAAAATcc/D0i89sUs91Y/s1600/CE510--Three-Bullet-Shells-On-The-Floor.jpg)
(http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/day2.jpg)
JohnM
-
Norman heard the bolt action and heard the shells hit the floor and what do you know in the window above there was 3 shells and on the same floor a bolt action rifle.
But didn't hear Oswald's alleged mad dash to the stairs. Go figure. He also hung around the 5th floor in view of the staircase for 5 minutes or so after supposedly hearing somebody shooting at the motorcade right above him.
Seems legit.
-
Shifting the burden fallacy, part umpteen.
Who's Jarvis? Brennan and Jackson didn't see any shots fired. Why lie? As for Jarman, Norman, and Williams:
Mr. BALL. Did anybody say anything as to where they thought the shots came from?
Mr. NORMAN. Well, I don't recall of either one of them saying they thought where it came from.
Mr. BALL. But You did?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes.
Mr. BALL. And you said you thought it came from where?
Mr. NORMAN. Above where we were, above us.
Well, at least you sort of have Norman. "Above us" somewhere.
If somebody didn't, then by your narrative he or she would have to have been sitting there not making a sound while BRW ate his lunch. It's one or the other.
Quit squirming.
What's it going to be Trolletti ?
No shots fired from the SE corner or a gunman firing after BRW left ?
It's one of the two, goofy.
Your final troll answer, please !
-
But didn't hear Oswald's alleged mad dash to the stairs. Go figure.
But didn't hear Oswald's alleged mad dash to the stairs.
Why would Norman hear Oswald slowly moving away?
I was looking at the man in this windows at the time of the last explosion. Then this man let the gun down to his side and stepped down out of sight. He did not seem to be in any hurry.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/brennan1.htm
Go figure.
Indeed, refuting your own invented narrative is kinda cute.
JohnM
-
Since the topic has come up this post seems appropriate.
************************************
The Warren Commission (WC) said that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) fired three shots from the sixth floor southeastern window of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) window. They had NO evidence showing LHO was on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting so the next best option they had was the testimony of three men who were on the fifth floor of the TSBD during the assassination. This post will look at their words.
********************************
The three men on the fifth floor were Bonnie Ray Williams, Harold Norman and James Jarman. Let?s look at their testimonies to see what they heard and possibly saw on November 22, 1963.
Williams said he ate his chicken sandwich, Fritos and Dr. Pepper on the sixth floor and never saw anyone there when he was there.
Mr. DULLES. You ate your lunch on the sixth floor?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.
Mr. DULLES. And you were all alone?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.
He would stay until either 12:15 or close to 12:20 p.m. too, and yet he saw or heard no one else on the sixth floor! True, there were boxes stacked up, but he did NOT HEAR anyone else on the sixth floor while he was there. Keep in mind, the rifle was allegedly disassembled so LHO would have had to reassemble this and that would have made noise. So would removing it from a paper bag, but Williams heard NOTHING. How could LHO wait until possibly as late as 12:20 p.m. to do all that he had to do and still shoot President John F. Kennedy (JFK) when he was due past there at 12:25 p.m.? [Note: JFK was running five minutes late due to a longer stay at Love Field, but LHO would NOT know this.]
Mr. BALL. Now, do you know what time that was?
Mr. WILLIAMS. I do not know the exact time.
Mr. BALL. It was?
Mr. WILLIAMS. It was after I had left the sixth floor, after I had eaten the chicken sandwich. I finished the chicken sandwich maybe 10 or 15 minutes after 12. I could say approximately what time it was.
Mr. BALL. Approximately what time was it?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Approximately 12:20, maybe.
Furthermore, Williams makes a comment that is very illuminating as it shows OTHERS planned to go up to the sixth floor to watch the motorcade.
Mr. BALL. You say you went back upstairs. Where did you go?
Mr. WILLIAMS. I went back up to the sixth floor.
Mr. BALL. Why did you go to the sixth floor?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, at the time everybody was talking like they was going to watch from the sixth floor. I think Billy Lovelady said he wanted to watch from up there. And also my friend; this Spanish boy, by the name of Danny Arce, we had agreed at first to come back up to the sixth floor. So I thought everybody was going to be on the sixth floor.
Mr. BALL. Did anybody go back?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Nobody came back up. So I just left.
This testimony causes us to ask some serious questions. Firstly, why did Lovelady NOT come up as he said he was going to according to Williams? Why did Arce not come up either? Why did no one come up as they said they were going to do? Secondly, and even more seriously, why would LHO pick a floor that would have people on it to shoot JFK from? These are questions that were NEVER asked let alone answered from what I have read for twenty-five years.
After eating his lunch, and seeing no one else was coming up, he left for the fifth floor.
Mr. BALL. Where did you go when you left there?
Mr. WILLIAMS. I went down to the fifth floor.
He then stopped on the fifth floor to see if anyone was there. He was kind of sure they were based on what they heard. This is KEY testimony so read it carefully.
Mr. BALL. Why did you stop on the fifth floor?
Mr. WILLIAMS. To see if there was anyone there.
Mr. BALL. Did you know there was anyone there before you started down?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, I thought I heard somebody walking, the windows moving or something. I said maybe someone is down there, I said to myself. And I just went on down.
Mr. BALL. Did you find anybody there?
Mr. WILLIAMS. As I remember, when I was walking up, I think Harold Norman and James Jarman as I remember, they was down facing the Elm Street on the fifth floor, as I remember.
Notice how he said he thought ?he heard someone walking? and ?windows moving or something?, but the WC would claim these three men did NOT hear anyone walking or running on the sixth floor! Why not?
Jarman would also head to the fifth floor with Norman.
Mr. BALL - Where did you go?
Mr. JARMAN - To the fifth floor.
Mr. BALL - Why did you go to the fifth floor?
Mr. JARMAN - We just decided to go to the fifth floor.
Mr. BALL - Was there any reason why you should go to the fifth floor any more than the fourth or the sixth?
Mr. JARMAN - No.
Here is what Norman said before the WC.
Mr. BALL. And you went up to the fifth floor?
Mr. NORMAN. Fifth floor.
Mr. BALL. Why did you go to the fifth floor?
Mr. NORMAN. Usually, one reason was you usually fill orders, I fill quite a few orders from the fifth floor and I figured I could get, you know, a better view of the parade or motorcade or whatever it is from the fifth floor because I was more familiar with that floor.
Based on this testimony it would seem Norman directed himself and Jarman to the fifth floor since he knew it had a good view of Elm Street from it. Then Williams joined them at some time, but Norman couldn?t say when.
Mr. BALL. Did somebody join you there?
Mr. NORMAN. Bonnie Ray, I can't remember if he was there when we got there or he came later. I know he was with us a period of time later.
Mr. BALL. And then did he come down before the President's motorcade came by?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes; he was with us before the motorcade came by.
He is then shown Commission Exhibit (CE) 482 that depicts himself and Williams in it. Here is CE 482:
http://www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0113b.htm
Mr. BALL. I show you some pictures here. This is Commission Exhibit No. 482. Do you recognize anybody in that window?
Mr. NORMAN. That is myself and that is Bonnie Ray Williams.
Mr. BALL. "Myself" is pointed to as to the window in the extreme southeast corner of the fifth floor, is that right?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes.
Mr. BALL. And Bonnie Ray is in the window next to you?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes.
CE 487 will show you the floor plan for the fifth floor and the three men picked the area below the alleged Sniper?s Nest (SN) on the sixth floor to watch the motorcade from. CE 487:
http://www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0115b.htm
Mr. BALL. Of the fifth floor rather, which is Commission's 487, and this is the southeast corner window. To what window did you and your two friends run?
Mr. NORMAN. This is the south. This is the window we were in. We came to this last, I believe it is the next to the last or the last window on this end here, right here.
So the scene is set for us. These men were supposedly below the same spot LHO was allegedly shooting JFK from on the sixth floor. Let?s see what they say about the shooting event.
This is what Jarman said about the event in his WC testimony.
Mr. BALL - Were you still on your knees looking up?
Mr. JARMAN - Well, after the third shot was fired, I think I got up and I run over to Harold Norman and Bonnie Ray Williams, and told them, I said, I told them that it wasn't a backfire or anything, that somebody was shooting at the President.
Mr. BALL - And then did they say anything?
Mr. JARMAN - Hank said, Harold Norman, rather, said that he thought the shots had came from above us, and I noticed that Bonnie Ray had a few debris in his head. It was sort of white stuff, or something, and I told him not to brush it out, but he did anyway.
Mr. BALL - He had some white what, like plaster?
Mr. JARMAN - Like some come off a brick or plaster or something.
Mr. BALL - Did Norman say anything else that you remember?
Mr. JARMAN - He said that he was sure that the shot came from inside the building because he had been used to guns and all that, and he said it didn't sound like it was too far off anyway. And so we ran down to the west side of the building.
Notice that Jarman says that Norman said a shot came from above them initially, but then it was amended to INSIDE the building, but not from the sixth floor in particular. Also note, that he says they all ran down to the WEST end of the building and that would be the opposite from where the shots came from according to the WC. Why would they do this? Well, Norman tells us why.
Mr. BALL. Why did you run down to that window?
Mr. NORMAN. Well, it seems as though everyone else was running towards the railroad tracks, and we ran over there.
Curious to see why everybody was running that way for. I thought maybe?
Mr. BALL. Did anybody say anything about going up to the sixth floor?
Mr. NORMAN. I don't remember anyone saying about going up to the sixth floor.
Mr. BALL. And you went to what window?
Mr. NORMAN. To the west window.
He said they ran to the WEST window because it seemed as ?though everyone else was running towards the railroad tracks?? and that NO one said anything about a shot from the sixth floor! Why would they do this if Norman had said the shots came from above as was stated earlier? Would the movements of others matter at that point? Also, why would so many be moving to the railroad tracks IF the WC?s claims are correct? Williams would be more agreeable to the WC as he would attribute words to Norman that made it sound like the shots came from above them as claimed.
Mr. BALL. Did you notice where did you think the shots came from?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, the first shot-I really did not pay any attention to it, because I did not know what was happening. The second shot, it sounded like it was right in the building, the second and third shot. And it sounded-it even shook the building, the side we were on cement fell on my head.
Mr. BALL. You say cement fell on your head?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Cement, gravel, dirt, or something from the old building, because it shook the windows and everything. Harold was sitting next to me, and he said it came right from over our head. If you want to know my exact words, I could tell you.
Mr. BALL. Tell us.
Mr. WILLIAMS. My exact words were, "No bull :cop:." And we jumped up.
Mr. BALL. Norman said what?
Mr. WILLIAMS. He said it came directly over our heads. "I can even hear the shell being ejected from the gun hitting the floor." But I did not hear the shell being ejected from the gun, probably because I wasn't paying attention.
Mr. BALL. Norman said he could hear it?
Mr. WILLIAMS. He said he could hear it. He was directly under the window that Oswald shot from.
Mr. BALL. He was directly under. He told you as he got up from the window that he could hear the shells ejected from the gun?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes; he did.
This is magic to the ears of the WC, but we see that Norman and the others were more interested in what happened near the Grassy Knoll (GK) as he instead went on about what he saw the police doing near the railroad tracks. Why would he do this if he thought the shots came from directly over him?
Mr. BALL. Here is a picture 489 taken last Friday when you were with me on that floor?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Is that the window you looked out of?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes, sir; I believe that is the one.
Mr. BALL. What did you look at when you looked out that window?
Mr. NORMAN. We saw the policeman, and I guess they were detectives, they were searching the empty cars over there. I remember seeing some guy on top of them.
Mr. BALL. On top of the cars?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes. They were going through there.
Mr. BALL. You saw police officers searching cars over on the railroad tracks?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes.
Here is CE 489:
http://www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0116a.htm
They all seemed to be interested in what went on in the railroad yard, and not the sixth floor. Why would they be doing all this searching over there if the shots came from the TSBD as the WC claimed? He would be asked about the shells though and would confirm what Williams said.
Mr. BALL. How many shots did you hear?
Mr. NORMAN. Three.
Mr. BALL. Do you remember whether or not you said anything to the men then as to whether or not you heard anything from above you?
Mr. NORMAN. Only I think I remember saying that I thought I could hear the shell hulls and the ejection of the rifle. I didn't tell I think I hear anybody moving, you know.
This is key as he did NOT hear anyone moving, and yet, Williams heard people moving on the fifth floor when he was on the sixth floor. How does one hear a shell hitting the floor, but NOT a whole man moving or running?
Mr. BALL. But you thought, do you remember you told the men then that you thought you heard the ejection of the rifle?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And shells on the floor?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Falling?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes.
Again, how do you hear a shell falling and NOT a man moving?
Mr. BALL. Did anybody say anything as to where they thought the shots came from?
Mr. NORMAN. Well, I don't recall of either one of them saying they thought where it came from.
Mr. BALL. But You did?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes.
Mr. BALL. And you said you thought it came from where?
Mr. NORMAN. Above where we were, above us.
If this is so, why did they all run to the WEST side of the building to see what was going on?
Mr. BALL. After that happened, what did you do?
Mr. NORMAN. Well, we ran to the farthest window facing the expressway.
Something doesn?t add up here.
Mr. BALL. You ran down to the west side of the building?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.
Something really doesn?t add up here.
Mr. BALL - Did Norman say anything about hearing cartridges or ejection or anything like that, do you remember?
Mr. JARMAN - That was after we got down to the west side of the building.
Mr. BALL - After you got down where?
Mr. JARMAN - To the west side of the building.
I think we need a new calculator as it really doesn?t add up correctly. Jarman would say something else very interesting too about what he saw when he looked toward the railroad yard.
Mr. BALL - I show you 489. Is that a picture of the west window?
Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - And what did you see when you looked out that window?
Mr. JARMAN - When I looked out that window, I saw the policemen and the secret agents, the FBI men, searching the boxcar yard and the passenger train and things like that.
How in the world could the FBI be there so fast? Keep in mind this almost immediately after the shots were fired as he ran to the west window and looked out. This shows me that the FBI were there and ready to move, but how do you explain this UNLESS they knew the assassination was going to happen? The Secret Service (SS ) are responsible for the president?s protection so why would there be so many FBI agents around Dealey Plaza (DP)?
Back to the shells hitting the floor with Jarman.
Mr. BALL - What did you hear him say?
Mr. JARMAN - He said it was something sounded like cartridges hitting the floor, and he could hear the action of the rifle, I mean the bolt, as it were pulled back, or something like that.
Mr. BALL - Had you heard anything like that?
Mr. JARMAN - No, sir; I hadn't
Mr. BALL - Had you heard any person running upstairs?
Mr. JARMAN - No, sir.
Mr. BALL - Or any steps upstairs?
Mr. JARMAN - No, sir.
Mr. BALL - Any noise at all up there?
Mr. JARMAN - None.
This shows us the WC had to rely on Norman alone as both Jarman and Williams said they heard nothing including a person moving around.
Mr. BALL. Did Norman say anything about the bolt?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes. He said he could hear the rifle, and it sounded like it was right above. He said he could hear the rifle being ejected, the shells hitting the floor.
Mr. BALL. But you could not hear this?
Mr. WILLIAMS. No; I could not hear it.
Only Norman said he heard it. One could say, ?Well he was directly below the alleged SN?, but the point is the floor was old and creaky and you could see through it.
Mr. BALL. That was an old floor, wasn't it?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes; it was.
Mr. BALL. Could you see light through the floor from the fifth to the sixth floor as you would look above your window?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, at the time, that day of November 22d, I did not notice that?. So therefore I would say that you could see light much more when the old floor was there.
Mr. BALL. When you were there the other day, you looked up through a crack in the ceiling of the fifth floor?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Could you see the new floor?
Mr. WILLIAMS. You could. You could see daylight through.
So any movement or noise should have been heard by all of them, and not just Norman IMO. Williams is asked why they did NOT go up to the sixth floor instead of running to the WEST window.
Representative FORD. Why didn't you go up to the sixth floor?
Mr. WILLIAMS. I really don't know. We just never did think about it. And after we had made this last stop, James Jarman said, "Maybe we better get the hell out of here." And so we just ran down to the fourth floor, and came on down. We never did think about it, going up to the sixth floor. Maybe it was just because we were frightened.
If you were frightened why not leave the building all together instead of running to the WEST window? Why would they think going down would be safer as the shooter had to go down too, didn?t they?
Mr. BALL - What did you men do after you looked out the window toward the railroad tracks from the west window?
Mr. JARMAN - Well, after Norman had made his statement that he had heard the cartridges hit the floor and this bolt action, I told him we'd better get the hell from up here.
Mr. BALL - Did anybody suggest you go up to the sixth floor?
Mr. JARMAN - No, Sir.
Mr. BALL - And where did. you go then?
Mr. JARMAN - Down. We ran to the elevator first, but the elevator had gone down.
It was probably safer on the sixth floor than anywhere as the shooter would NOT stay there.
Mr. BALL. Did anybody say anything about going up to the sixth floor?
Mr. NORMAN. I don't remember anyone saying about going up to the sixth floor.
They never considered going to the sixth floor at all and instead ran to the WEST side of the building. This says a lot whether you accept their excuse of being scared or not. Jarman said he did not hear any bolt working above him.
Mr. McCLOY You have had military experience, haven't you?
Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir.
Mr. McCLOY. And you can recognize rifle shots when you hear them?
Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir.
Mr. McCLOY - But you didn't hear, you didn't catch the sound of the bolt moving?
Mr. JARMAN - No, sir.
Williams would say he did NOT hear anyone upstairs moving around.
Mr. BALL. Did you hear anything upstairs at all?
Mr. WILLIAMS. No, sir; I didn't hear anything.
Mr. BALL. Any footsteps?
Mr. WILLIAMS. No, sir. Probably the reason we didn't hear anything is because, you know, after the shots we were running, too, and that was making a louder noise.
This testimony about running right after the shots is countered by what Jarman said.
Mr. BALL - How long was it before you ran down to the west end, from the time of the shots until you ran down to the west end, about how much time do you think it was?
Mr. JARMAN - After the third shot was fired I would say it was about a minute.
If they waited a minute (or close to a minute) as Jarman said, how would that wash out any movement or running on the floor above them?
Finally, let?s finish with this comment by Norman.
Mr. BALL. You did make a statement later to the Secret Service, didn't you?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes.
Mr. BALL. I have here a document 493, which is a copy of a statement made by this witness, which I now mark 493.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 493, for identification.)
CE 493: http://www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0117b.htm
Mr. BALL. The document that I have here shows the date 4th of December 1963. Do you remember having made a statement to Mr. Carter, Special Agent of the Secret Service, on that day?
Mr. NORMAN. I can't remember the exact date but I believe I remember Mr. Carter.
Mr. BALL. I want to call your attention to one part of the statement and I will ask you if you told him that:
"Just after the President passed by, I heard a shot and several seconds later I heard two more shots. I knew that the shots had come from directly above me, and I could hear the expended cartridges fall to the floor. I could also hear the bolt action of the rifle. I also saw some dust fall from the ceiling of the fifth floor and I felt sure that whoever had fired the shots was directly above me."
Did you make that statement to the Secret Service man?
Mr. NORMAN. I don't remember making a statement that I knew the shots came from directly above us. I didn't make that statement. And I don't remember saying I heard several seconds later. I merely told him that I heard three shots because I didn't have any idea what time it was.
Mr. BALL. I see. Did you tell them that you heard the bolt action of the rifle?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes.
Mr. BALL. And that you heard the expended cartridges fall to the floor?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes; I heard them making a sound.
He said he NEVER said he heard the shots coming from directly above so the claim of the WC saying LHO was directly above Norman firing three shots is NOT supported here. Also, how can one hear a bolt and falling shells, but NOT a person moving or running? Furthermore, it would seem the FBI once again added things that were NOT said by a witness.
He would also say he did NOT say he heard the bolt moving.
Mr. BALL. What language did you use when you talked to the Secret Service man, do you know? Did you say you heard the ejection or that you heard the bolt action? Which did you use?
Mr. NORMAN. I probably said the ejection.
Mr. BALL. That is what you think you said?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes.
So he supposedly heard the ejection and the shell hitting the floor, but nothing else. But when the SS recreated it for him he heard the bolt working.
Mr. BALL. And a Secret Service man went upstairs with a rifle, didn't he?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes.
Mr. BALL. What did you hear on the fifth floor?
Mr. NORMAN. Well, I heard the same sound, the sound similar. I heard three something that he dropped on the floor and then I could hear the rifle or whatever he had up there.
Mr. BALL. You could hear the rifle, the sound of an ejection?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Did you hear the sound of the bolt going back and forth?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes, sir; I sure did.
Mr. BALL. You could hear it clearly, could you?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes, sir.
This was after a new floor had been put in too! He would say he didn?t even know if the sixth floor window was open or not.
Mr. BALL. And the window, was the window on the sixth floor also open?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes, sir; they told me it was open. I didn't see it.
The bottom line is this, how could he hear the ejection of the shells and them hitting the floor and nothing else? No bolt moving, no man kneeling and then moving and possibly running. It doesn?t seem possible when one considers the floor was old and creaky. Furthermore, with Norman's testimony the best you can say is SOMEONE might have been on the sixth floor firing a rifle as claimed, but you can't corroborate Norman's claims and you can't show it was LHO doing the firing.
Once again we see the evidence in the twenty-six volumes sink the WC?s conclusion as it does NOT point to LHO at all.
-
First, there is no getting away with assassinating the president.
Yes way.... Just tell all the main guys [Warren Commission] that if Oswald isn't slammed with the job that there just might be a nuclear war.
**Famous unsolved killings---------
https://www.ranker.com/list/mysterious-political-deaths/jacob-shelton
When JFK was gunned down there were something like 6o unsolved murders [maybe more] on the Dallas police books.
Yet the Keystoners solved two murders in less than two hours.
Immediately unraveled the Oswald murder! [Or did they?] Heh heh...good work.
** Does not include rappers or Jack the Ripper
-
Yes way.... Just tell all the main guys [Warren Commission] that if Oswald isn't slammed with the job that there just might be a nuclear war.
Yeah, because what better way to avoid a nuclear war than by pinning the assassinaton on a supporter of Castro's revolution and defector to the Soviet Union ?
Makes perfect sense. :D :D
The lack of critical thinking by the drooling kooks never ceases to amaze.
-
He also didn't shoot him from the TSBD so that is why you LNers use speculation instead of evidence. When was it proven that Sirhan Sirhan killed RFK?
You said recently in another thread that he had no hope of getting away even in the TSBD, so what's the difference? Why not go for the plan with better odds?
No supposed LN ever used a rifle before in the U.S., but you want us to believe a lousy shot chose a piece of junk rifle to do just that. Sure.
No conspirator ever used "a rifle before in the U.S" either. So again, are you arguing that JFK was not assassinated because no one - LN or conspirator - could have thought to use a rifle? Silly. Regarding his ability to escape, I was just responding to your bizarre argument that Oswald's chances of escape would have been enhanced by shooting JFK at Love Field. One of the single most ridiculous claims ever made here. Escape wasn't a factor in his decision making. Oswald knows his chances of escape are near zero. The TSBD gives him the best opportunity to commit the crime. That is his primary interest. Death or arrest is part of the equation in deciding to go forward with the act. He isn't simply going to sit down, however, and wait to be arrested even though he knows escape is improbable. Like most criminals he keeps moving for as long as possible. He has nothing to lose since he is either going to jail for the rest of his life or being executed. So he played out his hand. No great mystery.
-
No conspirator ever used "a rifle before in the U.S" either. So again, are you arguing that JFK was not assassinated because no one - LN or conspirator - could have thought to use a rifle? Silly. Regarding his ability to escape, I was just responding to your bizarre argument that Oswald's chances of escape would have been enhanced by shooting JFK at Love Field. One of the single most ridiculous claims ever made here. Escape wasn't a factor in his decision making. Oswald knows his chances of escape are near zero. The TSBD gives him the best opportunity to commit the crime. That is his primary interest. Death or arrest is part of the equation in deciding to go forward with the act. He isn't simply going to sit down, however, and wait to be arrested even though he knows escape is improbable. Like most criminals he keeps moving for as long as possible. He has nothing to lose since he is either going to jail for the rest of his life or being executed. So he played out his hand. No great mystery.
Spin away. No SINGLE person used a rifle in attempting to kill a POTUS. A rifle is most appropriate when a TEAM of shooters are employed.
LHO was a poor shot according to the Marines and then he went 4 years with NO practice. If he was the true killer he would have attempted something up close. Especially if we consider the shooting exhibition you LNers give him credit for in the JDT murder.
-
Yeah, because what better way to avoid a nuclear war than by pinning the assassinaton on a supporter of Castro's revolution and defector to the Soviet Union ? Makes perfect sense.
Warren Commission disclaimer....'a lone nut-no conspiracy could be found' :-\
-
Quit squirming.
What's it going to be Trolletti ?
No shots fired from the SE corner or a gunman firing after BRW left ?
It's one of the two, goofy.
Your final troll answer, please !
The only one squirming here is the guy who thinks there was a witness named Jarvis. :D
Good think you have "Mytton" around to answer questions for you and make up for your utter ignorance about the case.
The gunman silently hiding in the corner while Williams ate his lunch is your narrative. You defend it.
-
Why would Norman hear Oswald slowly moving away?
Because Oswald was in the second floor lunchroom 75-90 seconds later.
I was looking at the man in this windows at the time of the last explosion.
Yeah, from the belt up. :D
Indeed, refuting your own invented narrative is kinda cute.
Says the guy with the invented narratives about everything.
Any lame excuses theories about why BRW only heard 2 shots, or why Jarman and Williams didn't hear anything hitting the floor?
-
The only one squirming here is the guy who thinks there was a witness named Jarvis. :D
Good think you have "Mytton" around to answer questions for you and make up for your utter ignorance about the case.
The gunman silently hiding in the corner while Williams ate his lunch is your narrative. You defend it.
Wrong again, Troll.
The gunman silently hiding in the corner is YOUR strawman narrative.
I'm of the opinion that the gunman probably entered the sniper's nest after BRW left the 6th floor.
For all we know, the gunman could be lurking in the stairwell, been on the other side of the floor, or taking a dump.
BTW Troll, have you decided whether any shots were fired from the sniper's nest yet ?
-
Yeah, because what better way to avoid a nuclear war than by pinning the assassinaton on a supporter of Castro's revolution and defector to the Soviet Union ?
Makes perfect sense. :D :D
The lack of critical thinking by the drooling kooks never ceases to amaze.
Dear Howie ...It will probably be a great surprise to you to learn that the conspirators LBJ and JEH specifically ordered the "investigators" to stay away from any theory for the patsy to have murdered a man whom he admired.
-
Wrong again, Troll.
The gunman silently hiding in the corner is YOUR strawman narrative.
I'm of the opinion that the gunman probably entered the sniper's nest after BRW left the 6th floor.
Then the time that BRW left the 6th floor is yet another thing you're ignorant about.
And what time was the motorcade scheduled to drive by again?
For all we know, the gunman could be lurking in the stairwell, been on the other side of the floor, or taking a dump.
And not seen by the departing BRW? That's a good trick. And I'm fairly certain that nobody found any human feces on the warehouse floor, cowardly troll.
BTW Troll, have you decided whether any shots were fired from the sniper's nest yet ?
I don't know -- why don't you ask Jarvis?
-
Then the time that BRW left the 6th floor is yet another thing you're ignorant about.
And what time was the motorcade scheduled to drive by again?
And not seen by the departing BRW? That's a good trick. And I'm fairly certain that nobody found any human feces on the warehouse floor, cowardly troll.
I don't know -- why don't you ask Jarvis?
I'm fairly certain that nobody found any human feces on the warehouse floor,
What?...You didn't know that one of the early theories was that the arch Villain Leee Harrrrrvey Ossssswald Hissss Booooo was so frightened as he fled that he soiled himself and some of the excrement fell on the sixth floor. I think Day stepped in it...... ;)
-
What?...You didn't know that one of the early theories was that the arch Villain Leee Harrrrrvey Ossssswald Hissss Booooo was so frightened as he fled that he soiled himself and some of the excrement fell on the sixth floor. I think Day stepped in it...... ;)
Day stepped in it when he concocted the magic palmprint a week later.
-
Wrong again, Troll.
The gunman silently hiding in the corner is YOUR strawman narrative.
I'm of the opinion that the gunman probably entered the sniper's nest after BRW left the 6th floor.
For all we know, the gunman could be lurking in the stairwell, been on the other side of the floor, or taking a dump.
BTW Troll, have you decided whether any shots were fired from the sniper's nest yet ?
The problem with going for a dump without knowing exactly when the motorcade would arrive, is that mystery guest #2 could literally get caught with his pants down.
-
Day stepped in it when he concocted the magic palmprint a week later.
Day actually wallowed in it..... He told so many lies that he was buried it the mess....
-
Spin away. No SINGLE person used a rifle in attempting to kill a POTUS. A rifle is most appropriate when a TEAM of shooters are employed.
LHO was a poor shot according to the Marines and then he went 4 years with NO practice. If he was the true killer he would have attempted something up close. Especially if we consider the shooting exhibition you LNers give him credit for in the JDT murder.
Spin away. No SINGLE person used a rifle in attempting to kill a POTUS. A rifle is most appropriate when a TEAM of shooters are employed.
LHO was a poor shot according to the Marines and then he went 4 years with NO practice. If he was the true killer he would have attempted something up close. Especially if we consider the shooting exhibition you LNers give him credit for in the JDT murder.
[Excerpt]
Attempted Assassination Attempts in America
-Wikipedia
October 29, 1994: Francisco Martin Duran fired at least 29 shots with a semi-automatic rifle at the White House from a fence overlooking the north lawn, thinking that Clinton was among the men in dark suits standing there (Clinton was inside). Three tourists, Harry Rakosky, Ken Davis and Robert Haines, tackled Duran before he could injure anyone. Found to have a suicide note in his pocket, Duran was sentenced to 40 years in prison.[69]
-
Day stepped in it when he concocted the magic palmprint a week later.
Wow, you're so desperate you'll even cozy up to Waldo. Whatever happened to your Walt's Fabrication List? Did you use it for toilet paper?
-
Wow, you're so desperate you'll even cozy up to Waldo. Whatever happened to your Walt's Fabrication List? Did you use it for toilet paper?
Not nearly as desperate as sending in a partial palmprint on an index card a week later that you "forgot" to mention earlier.
The Walt's Fabrications list is still there. In fact I referenced it just a little while ago on another thread.
-
Wow, you're so desperate you'll even cozy up to Waldo. Whatever happened to your Walt's Fabrication List? Did you use it for toilet paper?
Are you and Rob Caprio twins? He thinks ( is that the right word?) much like you or vice versa....
-
Spin away. No SINGLE person used a rifle in attempting to kill a POTUS. A rifle is most appropriate when a TEAM of shooters are employed.
LHO was a poor shot according to the Marines and then he went 4 years with NO practice. If he was the true killer he would have attempted something up close. Especially if we consider the shooting exhibition you LNers give him credit for in the JDT murder.
Again, no conspirator had ever used a rifle before to kill the President. So again your point has no validity. Someone did shoot JFK with a rifle on 11.22. even if that had never been done before. That in no way precludes Oswald from having done it. The rest of your post is more nonsense. Oswald was trained in the Marines to shoot with a rifle. He was fully capable of making the shots.
-
He was trained to shoot an M1 at a stationary target 200 yards away, and he was a lousy shot at that according to Nelson Delgado.
-
reason for the alledged assassin, Oswald to use his own building, the TSBD
1. Oswald was apparently confident that his rifle is untraceable to himself and he can therefore leave it in the building aftter shooting.
2. Oswald has decided that the best spot to shot at the moving JFK limo is from a position high above and behind the limo.
3. Oswald is familiar with all the floors of TSBD, has access to all the floors as part of his routine job, knows the staircase layout, the elevator locations, and most importanly, knows the work habits of the workers and where they likely willl be at lunchour between 12:00-12:30, thus the 6th floor becomes a particulary suitable location.
4. Easier for Oswald to get the rifle into his own building in a package and up to a higher floor he is familar with that he knows he can assemble rifle without likely to be interrupted, such as the 7th floor. And able to do this with least probability of arousing any suspicion of any other persons in the building, while moving up and down staircases.
5. Oswald may have thought he could get out of TSBD without being seen police, but that plan was interruupted by DPD Bakers early entry into TSBD.
6. It is unclear if Oswald had planned a plausible alibi for himself and if that involved being seen in the 2nd floor lunchroom at 12:13 but also attempting to display himself on the 6th floor with a rifle, just 2 minutes later. at 12:15 which would be a ratther risky thing to do, since someone might photograph him in the SW window holding the rifle at the time Arnorld Rowland would have seen him there.
-
Oswald knew that the 6th floor of the TSBD was abandoned during the lunch hour. President Kennedy's motorcade was due to pass by the TSBD around 12:25 PM. There was a good chance that LHO would be alone there and that no witnesses would see him departing after the shots were fired.
Oswald knew the layout of the building and that his presence anywhere--leading up to the assassination and after--would not be suspicious.
An alternative building to shoot from would be difficult to locate and access would be impossible to secure with certainty.
The only alternative location that was accessible and nearby to Oswald's place of employment was......"the grassy knoll". Then conspiracy theorists would be saying: "No assassin would shoot from a position out in the open where he could easily be seen. The shots had to come from the Book Depository. :D
-
[Excerpt]
Attempted Assassination Attempts in America
-Wikipedia
October 29, 1994: Francisco Martin Duran fired at least 29 shots with a semi-automatic rifle at the White House from a fence overlooking the north lawn, thinking that Clinton was among the men in dark suits standing there (Clinton was inside). Three tourists, Harry Rakosky, Ken Davis and Robert Haines, tackled Duran before he could injure anyone. Found to have a suicide note in his pocket, Duran was sentenced to 40 years in prison.[69]
Geez, so you think a 1994 example shows my comment about 1963 and sooner wrong? LOL. No wonder you LNers swallow the WC fantasy hook, line and sinker.
-
Are you and Rob Caprio twins? He thinks ( is that the right word?) much like you or vice versa....
Says the guy who NEVER cites any evidence just like Chapman. This is Wally's real task here -- try to make CTers look bad by pretending to be one.
Wally has never seen Volume 16-26 of the twenty-six volumes.
-
Again, no conspirator had ever used a rifle before to kill the President. So again your point has no validity. Someone did shoot JFK with a rifle on 11.22. even if that had never been done before. That in no way precludes Oswald from having done it. The rest of your post is more nonsense. Oswald was trained in the Marines to shoot with a rifle. He was fully capable of making the shots.
Spin away, but it won't work. It is infinitely more difficult for a single person to kill with a rifle than up close with a pistol. That is why NO LNer ever attempted their task with a rifle.
The use of a rifle confirms that it was a carefully orchestrated conspiracy utilizing multiple shooters.
-
Oswald knew that the 6th floor of the TSBD was abandoned during the lunch hour. President Kennedy's motorcade was due to pass by the TSBD around 12:25 PM. There was a good chance that LHO would be alone there and that no witnesses would see him departing after the shots were fired.
Oswald knew the layout of the building and that his presence anywhere--leading up to the assassination and after--would not be suspicious.
An alternative building to shoot from would be difficult to locate and access would be impossible to secure with certainty.
The only alternative location that was accessible and nearby to Oswald's place of employment was......"the grassy knoll". Then conspiracy theorists would be saying: "No assassin would shoot from a position out in the open where he could easily be seen. The shots had to come from the Book Depository. :D
Since the motorcade was due at 12:25 and BRW stayed until 12:20 it seems as your whole theory goes down the drain. Why wouldn't he have picked the 7th since it had a closet with a door?
-
Since the motorcade was due at 12:25 and BRW stayed until 12:20 it seems as your whole theory goes do
wn the drain. Why wouldn't he have picked the 7th since it had a closet with a door?
The protruding window ledge could have made aiming at the Presidential limousine more difficult.
-
Since the motorcade was due at 12:25 and BRW stayed until 12:20 it seems as your whole theory goes down the drain. Why wouldn't he have picked the 7th since it had a closet with a door?
The time estimates by witnesses are not likely to be absolutely accurate. Did Bonnie Ray Williams look at his watch? Did BRW wear a watch?
Was Oswald hiding quietly in the Sniper's Nest hoping BRW would leave the 6th floor before the President drove by the TSBD?
-
Spin away, but it won't work. It is infinitely more difficult for a single person to kill with a rifle than up close with a pistol. That is why NO LNer ever attempted their task with a rifle.
The use of a rifle confirms that it was a carefully orchestrated conspiracy utilizing multiple shooters.
Tell it to John Hinkley, Arthur Bremer and Squeaky Froamme. All failed attempts with a pistol. A rifle can be deadly effective. Provide us your "supporting evidence" that validates your claim that "it is infinitely more difficult for a single person to kill with a rifle than up close with a pistol." Start with the example of Charles Whitman who hit moving human targets at distances of three times the JFK assassination with similar USMC training to Oswald. And don't forget James Earl Ray.
-
The time estimates by witnesses are not likely to be absolutely accurate. Did Bonnie Ray Williams look at his watch? Did BRW wear a watch?
Was Oswald hiding quietly in the Sniper's Nest hoping BRW would leave the 6th floor before the President drove by the TSBD?
There are timestamps that have been repeatedly posted that show that Williams likely did not vacate the Sixth floor until at least 12.25.
Mr. BALL. Did you stay there?
Mr. NORMAN. Well, we stayed there I believe until we got the news that the motorcade was coming down, let's see, is that Commerce, no Main, because Commerce- we went back in the building, James Jarman and I.
A timeline of the Presidential Motorcade taken from Dallas Police Radio logs shows that the Motorcade got to Main about 12.24pm. Aslo Jarman estimated the time they left the front of the TSBD to be 12.20-12.25. They walked approximately 200 ft to the west elevator and about 160 ft to the SE corner of the 5th floor. This would take about a minute at 6ft per sec walking speed. The elevator took about 45 seconds to reach the 5th floor. They could have been in position on the fifth floor about 2 minutes after departing the front steps and may have been in position around 12.25 or slightly earlier depending on the accuracy of the broadcast. Williams claimed he joined them after they arrived.
-
The time estimates by witnesses are not likely to be absolutely accurate. Did Bonnie Ray Williams look at his watch? Did BRW wear a watch?
He didn't have to. He went down after hearing Norman and Jarman on the fifth floor, and their departure from the street to go upstairs is timestamped by them hearing a report that the motorcade was on Main street.
-
Start with the example of Charles Whitman who hit moving human targets at distances of three times the JFK assassination with similar USMC training to Oswald.
Whitman had been out of the Marines for 20 months, where he tested as sharpshooter on both stationary and moving targets. Oswald had been out of the Marines for 4 years, last barely qualified as a "marksman", the lowest rating, and had no practice in the intervening years. Whitman had been shooting since childhood. Whitman brought 7 firearms, including a semiautomatic shotgun and 700 rounds of ammunition. Oswald allegedly brought a cheap surplus Italian rifle with a misaligned scope and 4 rounds of ammunition. Whitman killed or injured 38 people over a 90 minute period of shooting. Oswald allegedly killed or injured 2 people over a 5-8 second period.
Other than both being in the Marines, they are in fact nothing alike.
-
Poor dishonest John. So many lies, intentional omissions, and baseless claims in one short post. Both Oswald and Whitman received similar training in the USMC. Oswald qualified as a "sharpshooter." There is no confirmation that he "had no practice in the intervening years." In fact, Marina indicates he did take the MC rifle to practice (no doubt another lie in the sinister plot). Both used a rifle in the commission of their crimes (although Whitman hit targets at much greater distances than Oswald needed too). There is no confirmation that Oswald's scope was misaligned at the time of the assassination. There is no confirmation that Oswald's shots occurred over 5-8 seconds. Simply because the objectives of the two crimes were different is not relevant in rebutting Caprio's nutty claim that "It is infinitely more difficult for a single person to kill with a rifle than up close with a pistol." That is the point being addressed. There are numerous examples to the contrary. Whitman is just one of many. A rifle can be a deadly weapon. That would seemingly be obvious even to the most dishonest contrarian.
-
Poor dishonest John. So many lies, intentional omissions, and baseless claims in one short post. Both Oswald and Whitman received similar training in the USMC. Oswald qualified as a "sharpshooter."
Speaking of intentional ommissions, "Richard", when did Oswald qualify as a sharpshooter and what was his most recent rating before leaving the Marines?
There is no confirmation that he "had no practice in the intervening years."
Well, no rifle in the Soviet Union. Maybe a hunting trip or two with a shotgun. Other than Jeanne DeMohrenschildt's "shooting leaves in the park", do you have any evidence of any actual shooting practice in Dallas or in New Orleans? I mean, you believe that he had a rifle rolled up in a blanket for 6 weeks instead, right?
In fact, Marina indicates he did take the MC rifle to practice (no doubt another lie in the sinister plot).
She did?
Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn at any time that he had been practicing with the rifle?
Mrs. OSWALD. I think that he went once or twice. I didn't actually see him take the rifle, but I knew that he was practicing.
There is no confirmation that Oswald's scope was misaligned at the time of the assassination.
So what? There's no confirmation that Oswald shot Kennedy either.
There is no confirmation that Oswald's shots occurred over 5-8 seconds.
Huh? When do you think the shots that you imagine that Oswald took occurred?
Simply because the objectives of the two crimes were different is not relevant in rebutting Caprio's nutty claim that "It is infinitely more difficult for a single person to kill with a rifle than up close with a pistol." That is the point being addressed.
So you get to make ridiculous false equivalences just because you're trying to argue with Caprio?
-
The length that Frazier gave was that of 2 feet of what Oswald was carrying,even when disassembled the rifle was longer that 2 feet. But here is a better question,why did he not shoot Kennedy when the car was on Houston St,he had a much better shot,and probably could have done it with one shot. Had he done when the car turned on Houston,i believe he could have had plenty of time,to may even leave the building with the gun.And i think Oswald got hire 2 or 3 months,before Nov 23rd.
-
The standard excuse is that this guy, who left his ring at the Paine's because he didn't expect to get away with it, didn't want to risk the Secret Service seeing him because he might not get away with it.
-
Now that dishonest John has acknowledged his misleading omission and lies, let's get back on topic:
Does the use of a rifle instead of pistol lend itself to proof of Oswald's innocence as Caprio suggests? Yes or no.
If no, we are in agreement and don't have to engage in an endless compulsion driven trip down the rabbit hole making arguments like a disbarred defense attorney on behalf of a guilty client.
-
The length that Frazier gave was that of 2 feet of what Oswald was carrying,even when disassembled the rifle was longer that 2 feet. But here is a better question,why did he not shoot Kennedy when the car was on Houston St,he had a much better shot,and probably could have done it with one shot. Had he done when the car turned on Houston,i believe he could have had plenty of time,to may even leave the building with the gun.And i think Oswald got hire 2 or 3 months,before Nov 23rd.
You need a Ouija board to answer questions that only Oswald knows the answer too. There are lots of good reasons that he may have decided not to shoot while the motorcade was approaching. JFK was sitting in the back row with two rows of individuals in front of him. The secret service detail would be facing Oswald as he fired. Oswald has a clear shot at JFK from behind while the SS detail is facing away from him. Do you really believe Oswald was going to carry the rifle out of the building after shooting JFK? What exactly was he going to do then? Walk down the street with it? He didn't even have a car. How much time would it have bought Oswald if by some miracle he had smuggled the rifle out? He is a known political kook to the FBI for defecting to the USSR. He works in the building from which the shots are fired. He is missing. Oswald would be the number one suspect once he is linked to the building. There was no getting away with this crime and coming back to work on Monday. Oswald had a limited window to flee. Like James Earl Ray, there was a small chance he could put some distance between himself and the authorities before his name became known but it was just a matter of time before he was caught. The good work of Tippit and Brewer put an end to it.
-
Now that dishonest John has acknowledged his misleading omission and lies, let's get back on topic:
I haven't acknowledged anything of the kind. You can't even tell the truth about that!
Does the use of a rifle instead of pistol lend itself to proof of Oswald's innocence as Caprio suggests? Yes or no.
If no, we are in agreement and don't have to engage in an endless compulsion driven trip down the rabbit hole making arguments like a disbarred defense attorney on behalf of a guilty client.
Is this supposed to be some sort of justification for telling lies like "Marina indicates he did take the MC rifle to practice"? What's so compulsive about pointing out your many falsehoods about the case? That's the difference between you and me. I actually cite your lies, not just make vague accusations I can't support.
-
You need a Ouija board to answer questions that only Oswald knows the answer too.
You mean like "why did Oswald go to the movies"?
There are lots of good reasons that he may have decided not to shoot while the motorcade was approaching. JFK was sitting in the back row with two rows of individuals in front of him.
That canard has already been dispensed with.
(http://photos1.blogger.com/img/247/1596/480/jfkreloaded2.jpg)
-
Speaking of intentional ommissions, "Richard", when did Oswald qualify as a sharpshooter and what was his most recent rating before leaving the Marines?
Well, no rifle in the Soviet Union. Maybe a hunting trip or two with a shotgun. Other than Jeanne DeMohrenschildt's "shooting leaves in the park", do you have any evidence of any actual shooting practice in Dallas or in New Orleans? I mean, you believe that he had a rifle rolled up in a blanket for 6 weeks instead, right?
She did?
Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn at any time that he had been practicing with the rifle?
Mrs. OSWALD. I think that he went once or twice. I didn't actually see him take the rifle, but I knew that he was practicing.
So what? There's no confirmation that Oswald shot Kennedy either.
Huh? When do you think the shots that you imagine that Oswald took occurred?
So you get to make ridiculous false equivalences just because you're trying to argue with Caprio?
Tell me John, out of the thousands of potential Patsies in Dallas, why would your Conspirators pick someone who couldn't shoot, had no confirmable history of practising with a rifle, and then set him up with a crap rifle with a wonky scope and only 4 bullets? LOL!
JohnM
-
Tell me John, out of the thousands of potential Patsies in Dallas, why would your Conspirators pick someone who couldn't shoot, had no confirmable history of practising with a rifle, and then set him up with a crap rifle with a wonky scope and only 4 bullets? LOL!
When did I ever say that "Conspirators" picked anybody and set him up with a rifle?
LOL, indeed...
-
When did I ever say that "Conspirators" picked anybody and set him up with a rifle?
LOL, indeed...
When did I ever say that "Conspirators" picked anybody and set him up with a rifle?
Exactly, nobody picked Oswald.
JohnM
-
Somehow in "Mytton"-World, this demonstrates that Oswald did it.
:D
-
Somehow in "Mytton"-World, this demonstrates that Oswald did it.
:D
Well JohnI, we can forget about Oswald when you can show proof that there were conspirators, well....?
JohnM
-
Well JohnI, we can forget about Oswald when you can show proof that there were conspirators, well....?
Why don't we forget about the conspirators that I never postulated instead? That's something you made up to divert from your inability to prove your own position.
-
The protruding window ledge could have made aiming at the Presidential limousine more difficult.
More difficult than avoiding a pipe and a tree?
-
Why don't we forget about the conspirators that I never postulated instead? That's something you made up to divert from your inability to prove your own position.
I thought you had your shooter.
-
The time estimates by witnesses are not likely to be absolutely accurate. Did Bonnie Ray Williams look at his watch? Did BRW wear a watch?
Was Oswald hiding quietly in the Sniper's Nest hoping BRW would leave the 6th floor before the President drove by the TSBD?
It is reliable when it benefits the WC. There is no way that he could reassemble a rifle with a dime and move 25-30 boxes (some as heavy as 50lbs.) without making any noise.
-
Tell it to John Hinkley, Arthur Bremer and Squeaky Froamme. All failed attempts with a pistol. A rifle can be deadly effective. Provide us your "supporting evidence" that validates your claim that "it is infinitely more difficult for a single person to kill with a rifle than up close with a pistol." Start with the example of Charles Whitman who hit moving human targets at distances of three times the JFK assassination with similar USMC training to Oswald. And don't forget James Earl Ray.
Thanks for proving my point. NONE of them attempted their shootings with a rifle. Not even when it was claimed that LHO was successful with a rifle.
I used to have this same debate with Dave Von Pein. Seems like old times.
-
Now that dishonest John has acknowledged his misleading omission and lies, let's get back on topic:
Does the use of a rifle instead of pistol lend itself to proof of Oswald's innocence as Caprio suggests? Yes or no.
If no, we are in agreement and don't have to engage in an endless compulsion driven trip down the rabbit hole making arguments like a disbarred defense attorney on behalf of a guilty client.
Stop lying. I never said that my point was proof of anything. The evidence is the proof that LHO shot no one. You should learn it one of these days.
-
Why don't we forget about the conspirators that I never postulated instead? That's something you made up to divert from your inability to prove your own position.
Why don't we forget about the conspirators that I never postulated instead?
postulate
verb
ˈpɒstjʊleɪt/Submit
1.
suggest or assume the existence, fact, or truth of (something) as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or belief.
Hilarious, every one of your posts "postulates" that something else happened and by definition if it wasn't Oswald then you have a massive conspiracy.
JohnM
-
Hilarious, every one of your posts "postulates" that something else happened and by definition if it wasn't Oswald then you have a massive conspiracy.
While you have your dictionary out, look up "false dichotomy".
You can't prove that Oswald did it, so you divert by inventing massive conspiracies to argue against instead.
-
While you have your dictionary out, look up "false dichotomy".
You can't prove that Oswald did it, so you divert by inventing massive conspiracies to argue against instead.
While you have your dictionary out, look up "false dichotomy".
What's to look up either Oswald did it or he didn't.
You can't prove that Oswald did it
There you go again, prove to whom? And no Oswald's pretend Defence Attorneys don't count!
so you divert by inventing massive conspiracies to argue against instead.
So stop alluding to some massive conspiracy and then I will have nothing to argue against, pretty simple isn't it!
JohnM
-
What's to look up either Oswald did it or he didn't.
OK, so far. That's the law of the excluded middle. That tells you nothing about which is true though.
There you go again, prove to whom? And no Oswald's pretend Defence Attorneys don't count!
And Oswald's pretend prosecutors do?
If you don't care about whether the things you believe are actually true, then sure don't worry about being able to prove anything. Some of us do care.
So stop alluding to some massive conspiracy and then I will have nothing to argue against, pretty simple isn't it!
The only "alluding" I've done is in your imagination. You have to make that up to avoid having to justify your own conclusions.
-
postulate
verb
ˈpɒstjʊleɪt/Submit
1.
suggest or assume the existence, fact, or truth of (something) as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or belief.
Hilarious, every one of your posts "postulates" that something else happened and by definition if it wasn't Oswald then you have a massive conspiracy.
JohnM
What is it with LNers and dictionaries? Good old Ben Holmes sure liked his too.
-
Thanks for proving my point. NONE of them attempted their shootings with a rifle. Not even when it was claimed that LHO was successful with a rifle.
I used to have this same debate with Dave Von Pein. Seems like old times.
Again, no conspirator ever used a rifle to assassinate a president. Using your logic, does that mean that no one assassinated JFK because no one had ever used a rifle before 11.22 to assassinate a president?
-
Tell me John, out of the thousands of potential Patsies in Dallas, why would your Conspirators pick someone who couldn't shoot, had no confirmable history of practising with a rifle, and then set him up with a crap rifle with a wonky scope and only 4 bullets? LOL!
JohnM
Dishonest John can't answer such questions as they would necessitate some proof. He is just a contrarian. Everything is potentially faked but he is not implying anyone is responsible for all the fakery. He has rambled on and on here but not answered the relevant question. Does the use of a rifle rather than a pistol lend itself to Oswald's innocence as Caprio stupidly suggested? I assume he agrees the answer is no but is too dishonest to answer.
-
Dishonest John can't answer such questions as they would necessitate some proof. He is just a contrarian.
Despite your repeated attempts, I am under no obligation to answer questions about fantasy conspirators of your creation that I never postulated. That doesn't make me dishonest, that makes me rational. You know what's dishonest though? Claiming that Oswald pulled a gun in the theater.
Everything is potentially faked but he is not implying anyone is responsible for all the fakery.
I never said "everything is potentially faked", Lying "Richard".
He has rambled on and on here but not answered the relevant question. Does the use of a rifle rather than a pistol lend itself to Oswald's innocence as Caprio stupidly suggested? I assume he agrees the answer is no but is too dishonest to answer.
Your own use of the word "dishonest" is dishonest! Not answering a question posed about somebody else's statement is not dishonest. I'm not your monkey. You never respond when your false claims about the evidence are exposed. You just ignore it and trot out the same false claims the next day.
-
Again, no conspirator ever used a rifle to assassinate a president. Using your logic, does that mean that no one assassinated JFK because no one had ever used a rifle before 11.22 to assassinate a president?
Why is this so difficult to comprehend? I am referring to a LONE shooter. You are making it about something else. NO lone gunman had ever used a rifle prior to November 22, 1963.
-
Dishonest John can't answer such questions as they would necessitate some proof. He is just a contrarian. Everything is potentially faked but he is not implying anyone is responsible for all the fakery. He has rambled on and on here but not answered the relevant question. Does the use of a rifle rather than a pistol lend itself to Oswald's innocence as Caprio stupidly suggested? I assume he agrees the answer is no but is too dishonest to answer.
It's not nice to call Mytton dishonest. True, but not nice. 🤣😅
-
It's not nice to call Mytton dishonest. True, but not nice. 🤣😅
Huh??... So you believe there is something wrong with being honest? Do I have that right, Rob?
-
Why is this so difficult to comprehend? I am referring to a LONE shooter. You are making it about something else. NO lone gunman had ever used a rifle prior to November 22, 1963.
LOL. You are trying to make the following point. Because no lone gunman had used a rifle to assassinate a president prior to 11.22, then that somehow proves that Oswald did not. The logical extension of that "logic" is that no conspirator had used a rifle to assassinate a president prior to 11.22, therefore no conspirator did so on 11.22. What is so difficult to comprehend about this? It is the application of your nutty logic. What you are in effect claiming is that because no one had used a rifle to assassinate a president prior to 11.22, that JFK was not assassinated by anyone.
-
LOL. You are trying to make the following point. Because no lone gunman had used a rifle to assassinate a president prior to 11.22, then that somehow proves that Oswald did not.
That not nearly as nutty as a wedding ring in a cup somehow proving that Oswald did.
-
Nice avatar. Appropriate but Pinocchio would have been an even better choice. Still refusing to answer the relevant question in this discussion while going on and on with your disbarred defense attorney nonsense. Dishonest John.
-
Nice avatar. Appropriate but Pinocchio would have been an even better choice.
Says the guy who's still lying abut Oswald pulling a gun, but has yet to come up with a single example of me lying.
Still refusing to answer the relevant question in this discussion while going on and on with your disbarred defense attorney nonsense. Dishonest John.
And still being dishonest about what the word "dishonest" means. Who appointed you the arbiter of relevant questions? Your title is King of the Strawmen.
-
Why is this so difficult to comprehend? I am referring to a LONE shooter. You are making it about something else. NO lone gunman had ever used a rifle prior to November 22, 1963.
Lincoln apparently was the target of an assassination attempt by rifle in August 1864 as he rode alone on his horse outside Washington.
The 1954 movie 'Suddenly" and the 1962 movie "The Manchurian Candidate" featured the sniper-rifle plot to eliminate a President and Presidential candidate respectively.
-
Nice avatar. Appropriate but Pinocchio would have been an even better choice. Still refusing to answer the relevant question in this discussion while going on and on with your disbarred defense attorney nonsense. Dishonest John.
Perhaps Mr Iacoletti is portraying himself as a horny devil.....
-
Perhaps Mr Iacoletti is portraying himself as a horny devil.....
That came from Jerry Organ, and it's awesome.
-
Dishonest John still spinning. Just answer the question. Does the use of a rifle instead of a pistol lend itself to Oswald's innocence? An honest person would just say yea or nay. A dishonest person would go off on some wild tangent.
-
Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall films that he saw called "Suddenly," and "We were Strangers" that involved assassinations?
Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember the names of these films. If you would remind me of the contents, perhaps I would know.
Mr. RANKIN. Well, "Suddenly," was about the assassination of a president, and the other was about the assassination of a Cuban dictator.
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, Lee saw those films.
Mr. RANKIN. Did he tell you that he had seen them?
Mrs. OSWALD. I was with him when he watched them.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PWf5HR8l7vc/VncRb9x4zvI/AAAAAAAAxXA/rbawmN0LdtI/s1600/Frank%2BSinatra.gif)
I just noticed that Jerry beat me to this reference and he also had more examples. Nice work Jerry.
JohnM
-
That not nearly as nutty as a wedding ring in a cup somehow proving that Oswald did.
From Bugliosi's 53 reasons, the wedding ring was only one part of one of those reasons the other half being the money left therefore the "wedding ring in a cup" only constitutes less than 1% of Bugliosi's total evidence against Oswald.
JohnM
-
Huh??... So you believe there is something wrong with being honest? Do I have that right, Rob?
No, as usual you are befuddled.
-
LOL. You are trying to make the following point. Because no lone gunman had used a rifle to assassinate a president prior to 11.22, then that somehow proves that Oswald did not. The logical extension of that "logic" is that no conspirator had used a rifle to assassinate a president prior to 11.22, therefore no conspirator did so on 11.22. What is so difficult to comprehend about this? It is the application of your nutty logic. What you are in effect claiming is that because no one had used a rifle to assassinate a president prior to 11.22, that JFK was not assassinated by anyone.
Still lying I see. For the umpteenth time I have never said my point was proof. The evidence is the proof and that shows that LHO shot no one.
What I have said, and you have 🏃♂️from, is that no LONE gunman had ever used a rifle before. So why would LHO do this when he was really not a good shot to begin with?
Why can't you support the WC's claim that he did and then show us how he planned to do this.
-
Lincoln apparently was the target of an assassination attempt by rifle in August 1864 as he rode alone on his horse outside Washington.
The 1954 movie 'Suddenly" and the 1962 movie "The Manchurian Candidate" featured the sniper-rifle plot to eliminate a President and Presidential candidate respectively.
And yet, when I asked for evidence to support the Lincoln one none was produced.
And you can show that LHO saw those movies and was influenced by them how?
-
Dishonest John still spinning. Just answer the question. Does the use of a rifle instead of a pistol lend itself to Oswald's innocence? An honest person would just say yea or nay. A dishonest person would go off on some wild tangent.
An honest person would go by the evidence, but that leaves you out. Do you even know what the twenty-six volumes are?
-
Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall films that he saw called "Suddenly," and "We were Strangers" that involved assassinations?
Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember the names of these films. If you would remind me of the contents, perhaps I would know.
Mr. RANKIN. Well, "Suddenly," was about the assassination of a president, and the other was about the assassination of a Cuban dictator.
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, Lee saw those films.
Mr. RANKIN. Did he tell you that he had seen them?
Mrs. OSWALD. I was with him when he watched them.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PWf5HR8l7vc/VncRb9x4zvI/AAAAAAAAxXA/rbawmN0LdtI/s1600/Frank%2BSinatra.gif)
JohnM
Great. His "evidence" is that Marina said so via a translator.
-
Great. His "evidence" is that Marina said so via a translator.
They make movies and advertise them to be seen they aren't a secret and even without Marina it's quite possible that Oswald was aware of the movie.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_oOWV5fWcZM0/TQTpZUcpKQI/AAAAAAAABO4/pg25_K8zCKw/s1600/Suddenly.jpg)
JohnM
-
No, as usual you are befuddled.
It's not nice to call Mytton dishonest. True, but not nice. 🤣😅
Robbie....If Mytton is dishonest....Then a dishonest person ( or a coward) would think that it's not nice to tell him ....
-
They make movies and advertise them to be seen they aren't a secret and even without Marina it's quite possible that Oswald was aware of the movie.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_oOWV5fWcZM0/TQTpZUcpKQI/AAAAAAAABO4/pg25_K8zCKw/s1600/Suddenly.jpg)
JohnM
As I thought. You CANNOT show that LHO saw those movies and was influenced by them.
-
It's not nice to call Mytton dishonest. True, but not nice. 🤣😅
Robbie....If Mytton is dishonest....Then a dishonest person ( or a coward) would think that it's not nice to tell him ....
It was a friggin' joke Wally. If only you worried about citing the evidence this much.
-
It was a friggin' joke Wally. If only you worried about citing the evidence this much.
A Joke?? maybe ...but it still reflects your thinking that an honest person doesn't call a spade a spade....
Like the honest nun who rushed into the church and complained to the priest that the construction workers outside were using vulgar language and suggested that the Father should go out and talk to them. The priest tried to brush her off saying...."Sister you have to realize that those are rough men and they believe in calling a spade a spade" And the Nun replied .."Oh No, Father....I heard them.... And one of them told the other to hand him the f....ing shovel."
Now THAT's honesty Rob......
-
A Joke?? maybe ...but it still reflects your thinking that an honest person doesn't call a spade a spade....
Like the honest nun who rushed into the church and complained to the priest that the construction workers outside were using vulgar language and suggested that the Father should go out and talk to them. The priest tried to brush her off saying...."Sister you have to realize that those are rough men and they believe in calling a spade a spade" And the Nun replied .."Oh No, Father....I heard them.... And one of them told the other to hand him the f....ing shovel."
Now THAT's honesty Rob......
You should know that this isn't true since I have pointed out your dishonesty many times over the years. You have even said it wasn't nice to call you a liar even though you were lying.
-
You should know that this isn't true since I have pointed out your dishonesty many times over the years. You have even said it wasn't nice to call you a liar even though you were lying.
Oh really?? What do you believe was the lie ??
-
From Bugliosi's 53 reasons, the wedding ring was only one part of one of those reasons the other half being the money left therefore the "wedding ring in a cup" only constitutes less than 1% of Bugliosi's total evidence against Oswald.
JohnM
How, to any rational mind, does leaving a wedding ring (if that's what happened) and some money for his kids constitute "evidence" of anything?
-
Oswald wanted to be conveniently located between his abode and employer. Testimony indicates he sought
a place to stay before applying for a job at TSBD. Testimony is regarded as rock solid when it supports a particular narrative.
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/johnso_g.htm
...Mr. BALL. Well, now, you knew Lee Oswald, didn't you?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, I just knew him when I seen him. I knew him as a renter, that's all.
Mr. BALL. Where was he when you first met him, at what place?
Mrs. JOHNSON. At my home--I was between serving hours and I come home for relaxation and to kind of help out. I cooperate in keeping the house and seeing after it, too, and I had returned home that afternoon and he seen the room for rent sign--the first time that he came by, I happened to have just rented the last room that one time. Occasionally, I will have them full and then they just go vacant; people just come in and out, stay a week and then are gone, anyway, at that time, I didn't have a room.
Mr. BALL. The first time he came to see you?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; that's something about 3 weeks before he came back.
Mr. BALL. This was 1026 North Beckley?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes.
Mr. BALL. He talked to you?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; the first time and the last time; the first time, he told me he wanted a room and I told him I was very sorry, I just rented the last room and he said he was very sorry, he wanted to get near his work and he didn't have a car and it being on the bus line, he was sorry he missed it. I said, "You noticed the sign." I hadn't had time to take the sign up and I told him, "I will take the sign up and if you notice the sign up again, you might stop by and I will have a room" and sure enough, he came by this second time and so this tiny, little room--it was at one time my library; that's what it was built for, and he came by and I said I only have this small room at the present time. I run an ad, it seems like, at that time, and I said I only have the small room and he looked at it and said, "I will take this room with the understanding I can have a larger room at the time you have one go vacant" and I said to him that's agreeable, so, at the time, I had other vacancies which in just 2 or 3 days I had two or three more accommodations go vacant, so I told him I had other accommodations that are larger and he said, "I find this room to be light and comfortable." It was four windows on the outside wall; it was all light. He said, "I find it to be light and comfortable and worth the money, you don't mind, I will remain in this room," so he didn't even look at the other rooms. He just remained in that room, what I call my library. When I utilized it into a bedroom, my father-in-law lived with a family of people on a farm and they went to Arkansas to live and he was getting old and he didn't want to be that far away from his son, so he wanted to come and make his home with us and I fixed this little library room--it was off and private from the other roomers--for "Pappy" to sleep in and the living room for him to sit in and he was---that's about 9 years before he was deceased.
293
Mr. BALL. Do you remember the date Oswald rented the room?
Mrs. JOHNSON. October 14. ...
It is fascinating that the Trump spin on the Mueller Investigation of alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election
is so reminiscent of the heapin' helpin' of feeble, nonsensical BS packaged and sold as the WC's 26 volumes.
-
How, to any rational mind, does leaving a wedding ring (if that's what happened) and some money for his kids constitute "evidence" of anything?
What's your thinking on why Oswald let almost all of his 'savings' and his wedding ring? Surley not the action of a normal husband setting off to work.
-
BTW that was just one piece in a very large jigsaw that when all the pieces are viewed as a whole points to Oswald and only Oswald as the double murderer.
-
How, to any rational mind, does leaving a wedding ring (if that's what happened) and some money for his kids constitute "evidence" of anything?
5. Friday morning, before leaving Ruth Paine?s house in Irving, Oswald left behind his wedding ring and $170, believed to be virtually all of his money, for Marina, demonstrating that he realized he might never see her again?that is, he might not survive the assassination he was contemplating. Moreover, as he left Marina that morning, Oswald told her to use the money to buy shoes for their new baby, Rachel, and ?anything? else that she felt was necessary for the children. Marina thought this to be strange since Oswald had always been ?most frugal? and hardly allowed her to spend any money at all.
RHVB
JohnM
-
5. Friday morning, before leaving Ruth Paine?s house in Irving, Oswald left behind his wedding ring and $170, believed to be virtually all of his money, for Marina, demonstrating that he realized he might never see her again?that is, he might not survive the assassination he was contemplating. Moreover, as he left Marina that morning, Oswald told her to use the money to buy shoes for their new baby, Rachel, and ?anything? else that she felt was necessary for the children. Marina thought this to be strange since Oswald had always been ?most frugal? and hardly allowed her to spend any money at all.
RHVB
JohnM
The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. Using your standard, which amounts to feelings and unwarranted
assumptions as to what is obvious, would you agree this testimony closes the question concerning the reliability of Earline Roberts?
Or do you simply assert a right to be Gumbyesque as to criteria you allow to form your assumptions?
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/johnso_g.htm
.....Mr. BALL. Has she been working for you for that period of time?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; I let Mrs. Roberts go a time or two, then I would hire her back.
Mr. BALL. there some reason why you let her go?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, she would just get to being disagreeable with renters and I don't know, she has a lot of handicaps. She has an overweight problem and she has some habits that some people have to understand to tolerate.
298
Mr. BALL. What are they?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Talking just sitting down and making up tales, you know, have you ever seen people like that? Just have a creative mind, there's nothing to it, and just make up and keep talking until she just makes a lie out of it. Listen, I'm telling you the truth and this isn't to go any further, understand that? You have to know these things because you are going to question this lady. I will tell you, she's just as intelligent--I think she is a person that doesn't mean to do that but she just does it automatically. It seems as though that she, oh, I don't know, wants to be attractive or something at times. I just don't know; I don't understand it myself. I only wish I did. ....
-
The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. Using your standard, which amounts to feelings and unwarranted
assumptions as to what is obvious, would you agree this testimony closes the question concerning the reliability of Earline Roberts?
Or do you simply assert a right to be Gumbyesque as to criteria you allow to form your assumptions?
Hey, the above is from Bugliosi.
And as for Gumby have you traced his family tree back to where it intersects with Jack Ruby?
JohnM
-
Once again Caprio suckers you people with a question he knows cannot be answered. When you then attempt to give your opinions, he puts you down with insults. When will you learn? This is the illness that is Caprio.
-
What's your thinking on why Oswald let almost all of his 'savings' and his wedding ring? Surley not the action of a normal husband setting off to work.
I'm not even sure he actually left his wedding ring, but even if he did, he might will have believed his marriage was over after Marina refused to move back in with him.
As for the money, I don't know it was "almost all of his savings" and neither do you. A father leaving money to provide for his kids doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
-
5. Friday morning, before leaving Ruth Paine?s house in Irving, Oswald left behind his wedding ring and $170, believed to be virtually all of his money, for Marina, demonstrating that he realized he might never see her again?that is, he might not survive the assassination he was contemplating. Moreover, as he left Marina that morning, Oswald told her to use the money to buy shoes for their new baby, Rachel, and ?anything? else that she felt was necessary for the children. Marina thought this to be strange since Oswald had always been ?most frugal? and hardly allowed her to spend any money at all.
RHVB
JohnM
Oswald left behind his wedding ring and $170, believed to be virtually all of his money, for Marina,
Really? And Bugs knows this, how?
demonstrating that he realized he might never see her again
Oh boy.... How in the world would Bugs know something like that?. Answer: he doesn't, he pulled it out of his a....
Marina thought this to be strange since Oswald had always been ?most frugal? and hardly allowed her to spend any money at all.
Wow... he must be guilty of a double murder :D
-
I'm not even sure he actually left his wedding ring, but even if he did, he might will have believed his marriage was over after Marina refused to move back in with him.
As for the money, I don't know it was "almost all of his savings" and neither do you. A father leaving money to provide for his kids doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
One of the strawman brothers again suggests that evidence is suspect but I'm sure he doesn't mean to imply anything sinister. Oswald didn't have his wedding ring on when photographed after his arrest. You can see it is not on his finger (he wore it on his right hand in the Russian tradition) in photographs. But here we have the baseless suggestion of someone who is not "sure he actually left his wedding ring" despite testimony from Marina that is was left for the first and only time of their marriage on the very morning Oswald is arrested for the assassination of the president. What bad luck. I guess the plan was to remove Oswald's wedding ring, somehow plant it back at the Paine house or get Marina to lie about it for the purpose of providing evidence that is not evidence of Oswald's guilt according to the strawman brothers. Great plan. Seems like a lot of effort given the mountain of evidence that already linked Oswald to the crime. They have to pile on by adding his wedding ring into the mix at significant risk. What if someone in the crowd had a film or photo of Oswald with his ring on etc. It's ludicrous.
-
One of the strawman brothers again suggests that evidence is suspect but I'm sure he doesn't mean to imply anything sinister. Oswald didn't have his wedding ring on when photographed after his arrest. You can see it is not on his finger (he wore it on his right hand in the Russian tradition) in photographs. But here we have the baseless suggestion of someone who is not "sure he actually left his wedding ring" despite testimony from Marina that is was left for the first and only time of their marriage on the very morning Oswald is arrested for the assassination of the president. What bad luck. I guess the plan was to remove Oswald's wedding ring, somehow plant it back at the Paine house or get Marina to lie about it for the purpose of providing evidence that is not evidence of Oswald's guilt according to the strawman brothers. Great plan. Seems like a lot of effort given the mountain of evidence that already linked Oswald to the crime. They have to pile on by adding his wedding ring into the mix at significant risk. What if someone in the crowd had a film or photo of Oswald with his ring on etc. It's ludicrous.
Yes, it's ludicrous, but it's just a reflex action by the Saint Patsy wannabe defense team to try to dispute every single piece of evidence in the case.
They can't help themselves.
-
Why did Oswald choose to take a low paying job at the Book Depository?
-
Once again Caprio suckers you people with a question he knows cannot be answered. When you then attempt to give your opinions, he puts you down with insults. When will you learn? This is the illness that is Caprio.
I too thought the title of Caprio's tread was weird.....Why Would LHO Choose His Workplace As The Location For Shooting JFK?
The title suggests that Caprio believes that Lee Oswald was the murderer and chose the TSBD as the site from which he'd murder JFK. I believe the title reflects on the odd "thinking" of the author.......
-
From Bugliosi's 53 reasons, the wedding ring was only one part of one of those reasons the other half being the money left therefore the "wedding ring in a cup" only constitutes less than 1% of Bugliosi's total evidence against Oswald.
JohnM
Quit spamming my thread with your unsupported nonsense.
-
Oh really?? What do you believe was the lie ??
Most of the things that you write are in opposition to what the evidence shows. Unless of course you read with a LNer bias I guess. Why do you sound like a LNer most of the time?
-
5. Friday morning, before leaving Ruth Paine?s house in Irving, Oswald left behind his wedding ring and $170, believed to be virtually all of his money, for Marina, demonstrating that he realized he might never see her again?that is, he might not survive the assassination he was contemplating. Moreover, as he left Marina that morning, Oswald told her to use the money to buy shoes for their new baby, Rachel, and ?anything? else that she felt was necessary for the children. Marina thought this to be strange since Oswald had always been ?most frugal? and hardly allowed her to spend any money at all.
RHVB
JohnM
Quit spamming my thread with your unsupported nonsense.
-
Why did Oswald choose to take a low paying job at the Book Depository?
Why wasn't he told about a permanent job with a much higher pay?
-
Why wasn't he told about a permanent job with a much higher pay?
Oswald had a lift directly from the Depository to his wife, besides a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
JohnM
-
I too thought the title of Caprio's tread was weird.....Why Would LHO Choose His Workplace As The Location For Shooting JFK?
The title suggests that Caprio believes that Lee Oswald was the murderer and chose the TSBD as the site from which he'd murder JFK. I believe the title reflects on the odd "thinking" of the author.......
Sure, I have written a 464 plus series sinking the WC's conclusions, but I think that he actually did it according to Cakebread. That makes sense. NOT.
May admits that the question isn't answerable, but this is exactly what the WC proposed in their conclusion. Why would LHO chose his place of work to shoot the president from? Who knows since the WC never bothered to find out for us or evidence showing that LHO did the shooting.
What is really interesting is that Cakebread is on the side of the LNers again. Why is a supposed CTer lined up with the LNers most of the time?
-
Oswald had a lift directly from the Depository to his wife, besides a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
JohnM
Is there an answer in there somewhere?
-
Is there an answer in there somewhere?
1. The airport job was only for an interview.
2. Frazier who worked at the same job just lived a few doors away from where his wife was staying, which made mid week visits to leave his Wedding Ring, virtually all his money and picking up a rifle as simple as asking for a lift.
3. In October Oswald was already rejected from a number of job interviews and had to resort to lying to even get his Depository job.
Honorable Discharge! What a LIAR!
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TBxp0ttqWdI/AAAAAAAAEQI/1GCW_6wjRTA/s1600/LHOsTSBDWorkApplication.jpg)
JohnM
-
Why is a supposed CTer lined up with the LNers most of the time?
So you make hundreds of allegations and when anybody questions even 1 of your dumbass ideas, they are suddenly branded your enemy. Kook!
JohnM
-
Quit spamming my thread with your unsupported nonsense.
See Rob this is the difference I was simply answering a question from someone else who btw you simply ignored, but you deliberately tried to disrupt my thread with an irrelevant wall of words because it seems you are slowly coming to the realization that your conspiracy nonsense is simply untenable.
JohnM
-
Why wasn't he told about a permanent job with a much higher pay?
I understand that the offer came on the morning Dirty Harvey started his new job at the TSBD. He had already gone to work, apparently. I haven't seen any report that Ruth Paine or Marina ever told him anything about it. Fringers will see that as evidence of conspiracy.
However, people in Oswald's position would be ill-advised to up-and-quit a new job on the first day; only to accept a supposedly better offer. Ms. Paine, a cultured woman it seems to me, would be aware of the practice of employment agencies following up on clients who they had recommended.
-
1. The airport job was only for an interview.
2. Frazier who worked at the same job just lived a few doors away from where his wife was staying, which made mid week visits to leave his Wedding Ring, virtually all his money and picking up a rifle as simple as asking for a lift.
3. In October Oswald was already rejected from a number of job interviews and had to resort to lying to even get his Depository job.
Honorable Discharge! What a LIAR!
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TBxp0ttqWdI/AAAAAAAAEQI/1GCW_6wjRTA/s1600/LHOsTSBDWorkApplication.jpg)
JohnM
And you know that he wouldn't have gotten the job how? You just want people to believe that LHO got the job at thr TSBD in one day when it was their slow season. The day LHO started at the TSBD, without Truly even bothering to check him out, he could have had a good chance to secure a permanent job that paid $310 a month.
What was the rush to hire LHO when there had been layoffs already?
-
See Rob this is the difference I was simply answering a question from someone else who btw you simply ignored, but you deliberately tried to disrupt my thread with an irrelevant wall of words because it seems you are slowly coming to the realization that your conspiracy nonsense is simply untenable.
JohnM
The difference is that I posted EVIDENCE. You posted a bunch of UNSUPPORTED nonsense.
-
I understand that the offer came on the morning Dirty Harvey started his new job at the TSBD. He had already gone to work, apparently. I haven't seen any report that Ruth Paine or Marina ever told him anything about it. Fringers will see that as evidence of conspiracy.
However, people in Oswald's position would be ill-advised to up-and-quit a new job on the first day; only to accept a supposedly better offer. Ms. Paine, a cultured woman it seems to me, would be aware of the practice of employment agencies following up on clients who they had recommended.
Explain why LHO was hired so fast when there had been layoffs. Then explain why Truly didn't even bother to check out LHO's past.
-
This is as funny, and inaccurate, as May's claim that I insult people. May used to call people pedophiles, drug addicts, drunks, homosexuals and felons to name a few derogatory insults. What a joke.
Cakebread is one of yours. That is very obvious as he has an aversion to the evidence like all LNers do.
I hope you can prove your allegations against Paul May because if you can't then you deserve to be banned for making up these disgusting accusations.
I hope Duncan gets involved.
JohnM
-
I hope you can prove your allegations against Paul May because if you can't then you deserve to be banned for making up these disgusting accusations.
I hope Duncan gets involved.
JohnM
He did it on another board -- ACJ. To Duncan's credit he never allowed this kind of talk on this board.
-
He did it on another board -- ACJ. To Duncan's credit he never allowed this kind of talk on this board.
)
So you can't prove you gutter level accusations, got it.
JohnM
-
)
So you can't prove you gutter level accusations, got it.
JohnM
"Having been gone a few weeks upon my return I read a few references to
something that took place regarding Yo Harvey but since I don't get
too interested in the personality wars some of the pre-schoolers on
this site engage in I missed what happened. Can anyone fill me in
with relevant information?" -- Steve
"Hi Steve...
Gil Clodumbo Jesus is on a trek to expose all the LN's who don't post
with their real names. It appears almost 2 yrs ago Yoharvey sent
Rossley a couple emails and the name Paul May was on the email. After
2 years Clodumbo finally "discovered" that Yoharveys real name must be
Paul May...Yoharvey has not been seen or posted ever since that happened." -- Justme1952
https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!searchin/alt.conspiracy.jfk/Yo$20Harvey$20/alt.conspiracy.jfk/PctlmD_j-dY
Paul May registered on this forum in 2009. It's funny that you didn't require proof of his accusations against me. I also never called for his banning. When you have the evidence on your side you don't need to have anyone banned.
-
Explain why LHO was hired so fast when there had been layoffs. Then explain why Truly didn't even bother to check out LHO's past.
What type of checking out would you deem appropriate for a job that involved filling book orders in a warehouse? If a guy didn't work out, he was canned. It was not exactly a national security job. But if you think the background of other TSBD employees with a similar job description was checked out by Truly and that Oswald was an exception, provide us with an example that supports your claim. Then explain what it is that you are implying. That Truly was involved in the plot to assassinate the president. And his role was to hire Oswald etc. Loony tunes.
-
What type of checking out would you deem appropriate for a job that involved filling book orders in a warehouse? If a guy didn't work out, he was canned. It was not exactly a national security job. But if you think the background of other TSBD employees with a similar job description was checked out by Truly and that Oswald was an exception, provide us with an example that supports your claim. Then explain what it is that you are implying. That Truly was involved in the plot to assassinate the president. And his role was to hire Oswald etc. Loony tunes.
It is common to check references and past employers. No check of any kind was done on LHO. What was the rush?
-
"Having been gone a few weeks upon my return I read a few references to
something that took place regarding Yo Harvey but since I don't get
too interested in the personality wars some of the pre-schoolers on
this site engage in I missed what happened. Can anyone fill me in
with relevant information?" -- Steve
"Hi Steve...
Gil Clodumbo Jesus is on a trek to expose all the LN's who don't post
with their real names. It appears almost 2 yrs ago Yoharvey sent
Rossley a couple emails and the name Paul May was on the email. After
2 years Clodumbo finally "discovered" that Yoharveys real name must be
Paul May...Yoharvey has not been seen or posted ever since that happened." -- Justme1952
https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!searchin/alt.conspiracy.jfk/Yo$20Harvey$20/alt.conspiracy.jfk/PctlmD_j-dY
Paul May registered on this forum in 2009. It's funny that you didn't require proof of his accusations against me. I also never called for his banning. When you have the evidence on your side you don't need to have anyone banned.
What email, without supporting evidence this is just another empty Caprio claim, and you know if you can't prove what Paul May said he could probably take legal action.
JohnM
-
This is as funny, and inaccurate, as May's claim that I insult people. May used to call people pedophiles, drug addicts, drunks, homosexuals and felons to name a few derogatory insults. What a joke.
Cakebread is one of yours. That is very obvious as he has an aversion to the evidence like all LNers do.
Cakebread is one of yours. That is very obvious as he has an aversion to the evidence like all LNers do.
Any rational reader can see that you're a nut Rob......A nut who believes that since I disagree with most of your goofy ideas I have to be a LNer....
is very obvious as he has an aversion to the evidence
I doubt there are many who agree with you.
Let's look at one example.... I believe the evidence is overwhelming that the rifle that was found buried beneath boxes of books was a Model 91 / 38 Mannlicher Carcano, and that Carcano was the ONLY rifle that was found hidden in, or on, the TSBD that day. You are on record as believing that a Mauser was found and Roger Craig examined that Mauser and saw 7.65 Mauser Stamped "right there on the barrel".
All of the evidence supports my belief.... And As far as I know there isn't one iota of evidence that supports your belief.
-
It is common to check references and past employers. No check of any kind was done on LHO. What was the rush?
So you have evidence that it was "common" in Oct. 1963 for Truly to check out the references of employees he hired to fill book orders? Great, let's see it. Once you have provided this evidence to establish that Oswald was treated differently from other similar hires, then explain to us what you are alleging with this line of discussion. That Truly was a part of the plot in Oct? It is interesting that Oswald was concerned with the number of dependents on his tax forms to save a few pennies in anticipation of the birth of his daughter. I guess old Lee wasn't too concerned with becoming a patsy as of Oct. 15 or he wouldn't have cared much about the number of dependents that he listed.
-
What email, without supporting evidence this is just another empty Caprio claim, and you know if you can't prove what Paul May said he could probably take legal action.
JohnM
It can't be proved since ALL of Yo Harvey's posts have been removed from ACJ. Isn't that convenient? I have removed my post given this state of affairs.
Why are you his constant spokesman?
-
So you have evidence that it was "common" in Oct. 1963 for Truly to check out the references of employees he hired to fill book orders? Great, let's see it. Once you have provided this evidence to establish that Oswald was treated differently from other similar hires, then explain to us what you are alleging with this line of discussion. That Truly was a part of the plot in Oct? It is interesting that Oswald was concerned with the number of dependents on his tax forms to save a few pennies in anticipation of the birth of his daughter. I guess old Lee wasn't too concerned with becoming a patsy as of Oct. 15 or he wouldn't have cared much about the number of dependents that he listed.
Please. Outside of small towns were labor is hard to find it has always been common to check someone out before hiring them.
-
And you know that he wouldn't have gotten the job how? You just want people to believe that LHO got the job at thr TSBD in one day when it was their slow season. The day LHO started at the TSBD, without Truly even bothering to check him out, he could have had a good chance to secure a permanent job that paid $310 a month.
What was the rush to hire LHO when there had been layoffs already?
Again with the false accusations, I never said that Oswald couldn't get the job, I simply said that he was already on a good wicket.
Besides, the amount of money for the type work seems excessively high, do airports pay their menial labor so much more than minimum wage? I reckon the hours would have been awful, the work back breaking and perhaps to earn the big bucks lots of overtime?
JohnM
-
It can't be proved since ALL of Yo Harvey's posts have been removed from ACJ. Isn't that convenient? I have removed my post given this state of affairs.
Unbelievable, you have never had proof that Yo Harvey was Paul May, you have no proof that he posted anything yet you still felt compelled to link Paul May to some of the most horrendous crimes the world has ever seen. Shame on you Caprio.
JohnM
-
Again with the false accusations, I never said that Oswald couldn't get the job, I simply said that he was already on a good wicket.
Besides, the amount of money for the type work seems excessively high, do airports pay their menial labor so much more than minimum wage? I reckon the hours would have been awful, the work back breaking and perhaps to earn the big bucks lots of overtime?
JohnM
You would have to ask the Texas Unemployment Commission as they said that was the pay. I would guess it might have been an union job.
-
Unbelievable, you have never had proof that Yo Harvey was Paul May, you have no proof that he posted anything yet you still felt compelled to link Paul May to some of the most horrendous crimes the world has ever seen. Shame on you Caprio.
JohnM
Paul May has admitted that he was Yo Harvey on ACJ and the first version of this board. He called me some of those things on ACJ so I know from firsthand experience. I simply can't prove it since all of his posts are gone. That's why I removed my post.
Stop acting so outraged as numerous people have said the same thing over the years.
-
Caprio has figured out that Truly hired Oswald to put him in place as the fall guy.
You see, Truly knew that JFK was going to be assassinated in Dealy Plaza months before the visit to Dallas was even planned.
That's why Truly didn't check Saint Patsy's references.
It's amazing that Caprio can figure this all out, and not be able to figure out what year Benavides died.
-
Paul May has admitted that he was Yo Harvey on ACJ and the first version of this board. He called me some of those things on ACJ so I know from firsthand experience. I simply can't prove it since all of his posts are gone. That's why I removed my post.
Stop acting so outraged as numerous people have said the same thing over the years.
Ok you removed the post and I respect you for that, lets move on.
JohnM
-
Please. Outside of small towns were labor is hard to find it has always been common to check someone out before hiring them.
So it should be simple for you to prove this was the standard practice at the TSBD as you have alleged. For example, by citing a background check done on a similar TSBD employee around this time.
-
And you can show that LHO saw those movies and was influenced by them how?
I'm actually surprised that Bugliosi didn't include this in his list of "evidence". "Mytton" however will carry on the banner of absurd arguments.
Oswald saw a movie about an assassination, therefore he killed JFK.
-
I guess the plan was to remove Oswald's wedding ring, somehow plant it back at the Paine house or get Marina to lie about it for the purpose of providing evidence that is not evidence of Oswald's guilt according to the strawman brothers.
Wow, just . . . wow.
"Richard" has no friggin' clue what a strawman argument is. That's why he makes so many of them.
-
Yes, it's ludicrous, but it's just a reflex action by the Saint Patsy wannabe defense team to try to dispute every single piece of evidence in the case.
:D
As if a wedding ring is a "piece of evidence in the case".
-
Anyone know why Pinocchio John is putting my name in quotation marks? I know he is dishonest, but paranoia appears to be new along with his bizarre avatar which seems to be an expression of self-contempt.
-
It is interesting that Oswald was concerned with the number of dependents on his tax forms to save a few pennies in anticipation of the birth of his daughter.
What are you babbling about now? His two dependents on Oct. 15 were Marina and June.
-
Anyone know why Pinocchio John is putting my name in quotation marks?
Because "Richard Smith" is an alias, just like "John Mytton" is.
I know he is dishonest,
Says the guy who think that it's "dishonest" to not answer one of his silly questions... Says the guy who has yet to come up with a single example of me being dishonest about anything and yet lies about the evidence on a daily basis.
-
LOL. It is amazing how Pinocchio John posts here so frequently but hasn't a clue as to what he is talking about.
Mr. TRULY. Yes; he did. And he told me I asked him about experience that he had had, or where he had worked, and he said he had just served his term in the Marine Corps and had received an honorable discharge, and he listed some things of an office nature that he had learned to do in the Marines.
I questioned him about any past activities. I asked him if he had ever had any trouble with the police, and he said, no. So thinking that he was just out of the Marines, I didn't check any further back. I didn't have anything of a permanent nature in mind for him. He looked like a nice young fellow to me--he was quiet and well mannered. He used the word "sir", you know, which a lot of them don't do at this time.
So I told him if he would come to work on the morning of the 16th, it was the beginning of a new pay period. So he filled out his withholding slip, with the exception of the number of dependents.
He asked me if I would hold that for 3 or 4 days, that he is expecting a baby momentarily.
So some 4 days or so later--I don't remember the exact day--he told me that he had this new baby, and he wanted to add one dependent.
He finished filling it out. And I sent it up to Mr. Campbell who makes out the payroll for the company.
Mr. BELIN. Now, on October 15th you saw him fill out the application form for employment in his own writing?
Mr. TRULY. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. You also saw him fill out the withholding slip, except for the number of exemptions, in his own writing, is that correct?
Mr. TRULY. Yes, sir.
-
Pure speculation but for me the likely reason Oswald got the job was that he presented as a well spoken, polite, ex Marine with a young family. This was a time and place when serving your country was held in esteem, and Truly gave and ex serviceman a job, like they had with Dougherty.
-
So I told him if he would come to work on the morning of the 16th, it was the beginning of a new pay period. So he filled out his withholding slip, with the exception of the number of dependents.
He asked me if I would hold that for 3 or 4 days, that he is expecting a baby momentarily.
So some 4 days or so later--I don't remember the exact day--he told me that he had this new baby, and he wanted to add one dependent.
So what's wrong with that? That's all true.
-
Caprio has figured out that Truly hired Oswald to put him in place as the fall guy.
You see, Truly knew that JFK was going to be assassinated in Dealy Plaza months before the visit to Dallas was even planned.
That's why Truly didn't check Saint Patsy's references.
It's amazing that Caprio can figure this all out, and not be able to figure out what year Benavides died.
Gee is claiming things that he can't quote me saying. Gee is lying like this because even he realizes that LHO getting a job that fast at a place that had laid off other workers seems strange.
He is trying to deflect by making claims for me.
-
Ok you removed the post and I respect you for that, lets move on.
JohnM
Thank you John.
-
So it should be simple for you to prove this was the standard practice at the TSBD as you have alleged. For example, by citing a background check done on a similar TSBD employee around this time.
Why don't you show that every employee was hired in one day like LHO?
-
I'm actually surprised that Bugliosi didn't include this in his list of "evidence". "Mytton" however will carry on the banner of absurd arguments.
Oswald saw a movie about an assassination, therefore he killed JFK.
That does sound like a claim that the LNers would make. 😄
-
Why don't you show that every employee was hired in one day like LHO?
Because I never made that claim. You made the claim that there was something strange about the failure of Truly to conduct a background check on Oswald. I interpreted that to mean that you somehow knew that Oswald was treated differently than other employees. That is apparently not the case.
-
I'm actually surprised that Bugliosi didn't include this in his list of "evidence". "Mytton" however will carry on the banner of absurd arguments.
Oswald saw a movie about an assassination, therefore he killed JFK.
"Mytton"
Hahaha, talk about petty, of course my name isn't "Mytton" just like your name isn't "Iacoletti" and that photo of the bald guy as your alias is obviously a forgery but do carry on John!
JohnM
-
Hahaha, talk about petty, of course my name isn't "Mytton" just like your name isn't "Iacoletti" and that photo of the bald guy as your alias is obviously a forgery but do carry on John!
Well, one of those statements is actually true. That's an accomplishment for you.
-
Well, one of those statements is actually true. That's an accomplishment for you.
All of those statements are true.
JohnM
-
:D
As if a wedding ring is a "piece of evidence in the case".
It initially speaks to Oswald's possible state-of-mind that morning. It could be seen as confined only to their relationship issues and nothing more. That much has already been acknowledged by most occupants of both camps.
-
Anyone know why Pinocchio John is putting my name in quotation marks? I know he is dishonest, but paranoia appears to be new along with his bizarre avatar which seems to be an expression of self-contempt.
He's been doing it to my name for months and it is a little bizarre because I don't think anybody in this Forum actually uses their own name and if they did and also used a photo of themselves then imo you leave yourself wide open.
(https://s.hswstatic.com/gif/identity-theft-intro.jpg)
JohnM
-
:D
As if a wedding ring is a "piece of evidence in the case".
You've been told before, the wedding ring is only one half of one piece of Bugliosi's evidence which amounts to less than 1% of Bugliosi's total case against Oswald.
JohnM
-
He's been doing it to my name for months and it is a little bizarre because I don't think anybody in this Forum actually uses their own name and if they did and also used a photo of themselves then imo you leave yourself wide open.
(https://s.hswstatic.com/gif/identity-theft-intro.jpg)
JohnM
I don't think anybody in this Forum actually uses their own name and if they did and also used a photo of themselves then imo you leave yourself wide open.
This is a obvious admission that Mytton is dishonest and uses an alias.....
An honest person doesn't worry about "leaving himself wide open" .....An honest man has little to hide...
-
:D
As if a wedding ring is a "piece of evidence in the case".
Yes, you bald little devil, (love the new avatar) the wedding ring and the act of leaving it behind is indeed evidence. Leaving the wedding ring and almost all of his cash behind goes directly to Saint Patsy's state of mind on the morning of 11/22/63.
Just another (albeit small) bit of evidence which points to your hero's guilt.
-
Gee is claiming things that he can't quote me saying. Gee is lying like this because even he realizes that LHO getting a job that fast at a place that had laid off other workers seems strange.
He is trying to deflect by making claims for me.
Caprio, you're the one that brought up the issue of Truly not checking Saint Patsy's references. Apparently, you attach some (sinister) significance to Truly not checking them, otherwise why bring it up ?
So do tell, why do you think Truly didn't check Saint Patsy's references ?
-
is dishonest and uses an alias.....
So your name is Walt Cakebread, prove it!
JohnM
-
I don't view LHO as a hero, however there are many ways to see any action.
LHO is often portrayed by LN's as a mean, wife beating jerk, but if he was indeed the shooter, the last action (for her) he did was give his separated wife his last possessions of any value, knowing that the money would come in handy if he wanted to flee the scene.
Furthermore the whole visit to the boarding room makes little sense. If he is the shooter on the run, why decide to go to a known abode to get changed, true he may have been going there to pick up the revolver (or he may already have had that) but then why get changed? The aimless erratic movement post shooting is either someone in panic (as opposed to his calmness on the 2nd floor) or someone who didn't expect to get out of the building alive.
-
The aimless erratic movement post shooting is either someone in panic (as opposed to his calmness on the 2nd floor) or someone who didn't expect to get out of the building alive.
Not bad, Anthony.
Why do you suppose he was in a panic, and why wouldn't he expect to get out of the building alive ?
-
I have no idea who here is or is not using an alias. For that reason, I would not assert as a fact, as "Dishonest John" has done, that specific individuals are using an alias. That is simply another in a long line of examples of his dishonest posts. Dishonest John has asked for some specific examples of his dishonesty. So let's revisit just a few. He claimed that I had been suspended from this forum. False. Not once in all the years that I have been here. He claimed that I am using an alias. False. He posted a copy of Oswald's arrest report with a notation stamped "deceased." When that was pointed out, he replaced that document with one that did not contain the notation and repeatedly asked where the deceased notation was from. He failed to ever acknowledge he had posted it. He stated that Martin never posted in a personal attack thread even though the strawman brothers both posted in that thread. He did this only because the thread was deleted and didn't believe anyone could confirm his lie. False. But if there is any ambiguity, how about strawman Martin confirm or deny whether he posted in that thread and then Duncan can suspend whoever here is the liar. Sounds fair enough. How about it Pinocchio John?
-
Because I never made that claim. You made the claim that there was something strange about the failure of Truly to conduct a background check on Oswald. I interpreted that to mean that you somehow knew that Oswald was treated differently than other employees. That is apparently not the case.
No, you are focusing on one part of it. You are ignoring the part about it being the slow season and other employees having been laid off. The WC acted as LHO's hiring in one day was no big deal, but it is given the time of the year that it occurred.
You will have to do the WC's work for them. What was the rush to hire LHO that his background wasn't even verified when it was so slow?
LHO had complained about missing job opportunities because possible employers were made aware of his defection to the U.S.S.R., so why didn't that happen here?
-
It initially speaks to Oswald's possible state-of-mind that morning. It could be seen as confined only to their relationship issues and nothing more. That much has already been acknowledged by most occupants of both camps.
Perhaps it is as simple as he didn't want his wedding ring to get damaged. The TSBD was a dirty place.
-
Caprio, you're the one that brought up the issue of Truly not checking Saint Patsy's references. Apparently, you attach some (sinister) significance to Truly not checking them, otherwise why bring it up ?
So do tell, why do you think Truly didn't check Saint Patsy's references ?
It is your responsibility to support the WC's claims made in 1964. Why did they not find it odd that LHO was hired so fast in a time of year that the TSBD was slow and other employees had been laid off?
Bonus question -- why didn't LHO's defection hinder him in this case as it had in the past?
-
I don't view LHO as a hero, however there are many ways to see any action.
LHO is often portrayed by LN's as a mean, wife beating jerk, but if he was indeed the shooter, the last action (for her) he did was give his separated wife his last possessions of any value, knowing that the money would come in handy if he wanted to flee the scene.
Furthermore the whole visit to the boarding room makes little sense. If he is the shooter on the run, why decide to go to a known abode to get changed, true he may have been going there to pick up the revolver (or he may already have had that) but then why get changed? The aimless erratic movement post shooting is either someone in panic (as opposed to his calmness on the 2nd floor) or someone who didn't expect to get out of the building alive.
His rooming house wasn't known by anyone that he knew. Not even Marina. It has been shown that some group did know about it. Most likely it was the people that he was working for.
-
It initially speaks to Oswald's possible state-of-mind that morning. It could be seen as confined only to their relationship issues and nothing more. That much has already been acknowledged by most occupants of both camps.
Agreed. So what's it doing in a list of "evidence"? Just padding the list?
-
I have no idea who here is or is not using an alias. For that reason, I would not assert as a fact, as "Dishonest John" has done, that specific individuals are using an alias. That is simply another in a long line of examples of his dishonest posts. Dishonest John has asked for some specific examples of his dishonesty. So let's revisit just a few. He claimed that I had been suspended from this forum. False. Not once in all the years that I have been here. He claimed that I am using an alias. False. He posted a copy of Oswald's arrest report with a notation stamped "deceased." When that was pointed out, he replaced that document with one that did not contain the notation and repeatedly asked where the deceased notation was from. He failed to ever acknowledge he had posted it. He stated that Martin never posted in a personal attack thread even though the strawman brothers both posted in that thread. He did this only because the thread was deleted and didn't believe anyone could confirm his lie. False. But if there is any ambiguity, how about strawman Martin confirm or deny whether he posted in that thread and then Duncan can suspend whoever here is the liar. Sounds fair enough. How about it Pinocchio John?
Well, this is a nice list of claims. Can you actually demonstrate that they are true? As we've seen, you're really good at making claims that you can't support.
-
This is a obvious admission that Mytton is dishonest and uses an alias.....
A lot of people here use their real names. Walt, Rob, Martin, and me. But also DVP, Paul May, Bill Brown. It's just the gutless trolls who don't want to take any responsibility for their actions who hide behind aliases.
-
His rooming house wasn't known by anyone that he knew. Not even Marina. It has been shown that some group did know about it. Most likely it was the people that he was working for.
Ruth Paine had the phone number for the rooming house. Ruth Paine was an FBI informer ( by her own admission to the WC) If Ruth gave the phone number to her FBI contact, they could have located that telephone in five minutes....
And I strongly suspect that the FBI did in fact know about Lee Oswald having a room at 1026 N. Beckley.
-
A lot of people here use their real names. Walt, Rob, Martin, and me. But also DVP, Paul May, Bill Brown. It's just the gutless trolls who don't want to take any responsibility for their actions who hide behind aliases.
If you think as I do....Then anybody who uses an alias is a liar..... and if they hide behind an alias they can't be trusted to be telling the truth about anything they say.
-
Ruth Paine had the phone number for the rooming house. Ruth Paine was an FBI informer ( by her own admission to the WC) If Ruth gave the phone number to her FBI contact, they could have located that telephone in five minutes....
And I strongly suspect that the FBI did in fact know about Lee Oswald having a room at 1026 N. Beckley.
Finally, you have said something in the form of a guess that makes sense. It may not have happened, but at least it isn't out there like most people your claims.
-
Finally, you have said something in the form of a guess that makes sense. It may not have happened, but at least it isn't out there like most people your claims.
Does this mean that you still reject my statement that the clip is NOT ejected from the Carcano in a manner similar to the clip from an M-1 Garand?? Do you still insist that you're right in saying that the clip is ejected from the Carcano just like the clip from the M-1 Garand?
-
If you think as I do....Then anybody who uses an alias is a liar..... and if they hide behind an alias they can't be trusted to be telling the truth about anything they say.
Including Lee Harvey Oswald.
-
Including Lee Harvey Oswald.
Yes, including Lee Oswald....However, Undercover intelligence agents wouldn't ( and couldn't) exist if they weren't deceivers and liars.
-
Including Lee Harvey Oswald.
Post of the day. Thread winner.
Thumb1: Thumb1: Thumb1:
-
Including Lee Harvey Oswald.
Too bad you can't prove that he ever used one.
-
Too bad you can't prove that he ever used one.
Too bad the negatives for the Hidell ID was found in possessions recovered from the Paine residence.
(https://i.postimg.cc/fWpJy3Xm/Cadigan_ex_20.jpg)
JohnM
-
His rooming house wasn't known by anyone that he knew. Not even Marina. It has been shown that some group did know about it. Most likely it was the people that he was working for.
Excuse me, but Dirty Harvey put O.H.Lee in charge of safe-house procurement. So at least two entities knew about the rooming house.
In addition, Alec Hidell was tasked with curtain-rod procurement for the rooming house apparently, so the possibility of a third entity knowing of the location is at least a possibility.
8)
-
Post of the day. Thread winner.
Thumb1: Thumb1: Thumb1:
+1
JohnM
-
+1
JohnM
+ 1
-
Agreed. So what's it doing in a list of "evidence"? Just padding the list?
Bugliosi himself said as much. And explained why he did so. Why won't you acknowledge that?
-
Does this mean that you still reject my statement that the clip is NOT ejected from the Carcano in a manner similar to the clip from an M-1 Garand?? Do you still insist that you're right in saying that the clip is ejected from the Carcano just like the clip from the M-1 Garand?
Do you still claim that there was a clip found in the SN when there is NO evidence showing that it was?
-
Including Lee Harvey Oswald.
Prove that he used an alias. This should be fun since the WC never did.
-
Post of the day. Thread winner.
Thumb1: Thumb1: Thumb1:
The thread winner according to Gee isn't based on the evidence. No surprise there.
-
Too bad the negatives for the Hidell ID was found in possessions recovered from the Paine residence.
(https://i.postimg.cc/fWpJy3Xm/Cadigan_ex_20.jpg)
JohnM
Exactly - the PAINE RESIDENCE. Were these found during the search with NO warrant or the one with a warrant? Exactly where were they found?
-
Excuse me, but Dirty Harvey put O.H.Lee in charge of safe-house procurement. So at least two entities knew about the rooming house.
In addition, Alec Hidell was tasked with curtain-rod procurement for the rooming house apparently, so the possibility of a third entity knowing of the location is at least a possibility.
8)
Is there any evidence in this post?
-
Exactly - the PAINE RESIDENCE. Were these found during the search with NO warrant or the one with a warrant? Exactly where were they found?
IIRC, the Paines consented to both searches. If they have your consent to search, they don't need a warrant
-
A lot of people here use their real names. Walt, Rob, Martin, and me. But also DVP, Paul May, Bill Brown. It's just the gutless trolls who don't want to take any responsibility for their actions who hide behind aliases.
(https://i.postimg.cc/rFM8fJqt/John.jpg)
http://www.atheist-experience.com/people/john_iacoletti/
So you're an atheist living in Texas.
Funny (strange) when you said 'My God, I hope not' at the beginning of a show you had with Dillahunty here:
(https://i.postimg.cc/HkWkktKC/iacoletti_atheist.png)
Freudian slip, John?
'Thank God I'm an atheist', goes the old joke.
Going to church is fire insurance to some folks
;)
-
A lot of people here use their real names. Walt, Rob, Martin, and me.
:D :D :D
How about Roger Collins?
Btw how can you prove that Walt, Rob and Martin are using their real names and geez what a coincidence that you picked these guys. Go Team Alpha!
JohnM
-
Too bad the negatives for the Hidell ID was found in possessions recovered from the Paine residence.
Too bad your exhibit doesn't have "Hidell" on it anywhere.
-
So you're an atheist living in Texas.
Yes -- is there some relevance to the JFK assassination?
Funny (strange) when you said 'My God, I hope not' at the beginning of a show you had with Dillahunty here:
Actually it was "oh gawd, I hope not". ;D
Glad you enjoy my volunteer work, but your purpose in bring that up here is...what exactly?
-
How about Roger Collins?
Don't know who that is.
Btw how can you prove that Walt, Rob and Martin are using their real names
Wouldn't you like to know.
and geez what a coincidence that you picked these guys. Go Team Alpha!
Hey, I also picked guys from your team Beta who at least have the guts to use their own names.
-
Yes -- is there some relevance to the JFK assassination?
Actually it was "oh gawd, I hope not". ;D
Glad you enjoy my volunteer work, but your purpose in bring that up here is...what exactly?
Seems your 'gawd' is Richard Dawkins ;D
Your fervour for insisting on what, to reasonable people, is an over-the-top standard of proof here, is now more fully understood. That is the relevance to the assassination.
Thanks for sharing.
-
Seems your 'gawd' is Richard Dawkins ;D
Where in the world did you get that? Oh yeah, you just made it up. Big surprise.
Your fervour for insisting on what, to reasonable people, is an over-the-top standard of proof here is now more fully understood. That is the relevance to the assassination.
Thanks for sharing.
Just evidence, rather than unsupported claims. That's all it takes. If you had it, you wouldn't need to divert with "reasonable people" and "over-the-top" excuses.
-
Where in the world did you get that? Oh yeah, you just made it up. Big surprise.
Just evidence, rather than unsupported claims. That's all it takes. If you had it, you wouldn't need to divert with "reasonable people" and "over-the-top" excuses.
Those are not excuses. They are observations. From the SaneStream.
Proof, you say? Well, it's hard to imagine just how much evidence it would take to convince a determined buff of anything, anything at all.
Dawkins calls 'believers' stupid. You call LNers lemmings. Both designations reek of desperation to get people to agree to whatever the f*ck your agendas are.
-
Don't know who that is.
Wouldn't you like to know.
Hey, I also picked guys from your team Beta who at least have the guts to use their own names.
Btw how can you prove that Walt, Rob and Martin are using their real names
Wouldn't you like to know.
Oops, do you know something that Caprio doesn't know? LOL
Dishonest JohnI strikes again,
(https://i.postimg.cc/sgJrB4q2/dishonest_John.jpg)
Hey, I also picked guys.....
Sure, we believe you, millions wouldn't but we do! Hehehe.
JohnM
-
Too bad your exhibit doesn't have "Hidell" on it anywhere.
(https://i.postimg.cc/VvGWdp18/LHO_fake_IDb.gif)
JohnM
-
Um, because he worked at the TSBD and not the Trade Mart? Because he knew the sixth floor was scarcely populated and afforded plenty of camouflage?
-
Those are not excuses. They are observations. From the SaneStream.
Everybody thinks his own opinions are the sane and rational ones. That's not an argument that you are actually correct.
Proof, you say? Well, it's hard to imagine just how much evidence it would take to convince a determined buff of anything, anything at all.
Well, given that in all your banter you never actually discuss the evidence that convinces you that your opinion is true, it's hard to imagine why you think there needs to be too much of it, or even what you consider to be sufficient and why.
-
Oops, do you know something that Caprio doesn't know?
Quite possibly.
So you believe Caprio now. Good to know.
-
Sorry, was this supposed to demonstrate that Oswald used an alias?
If so, yet another big FAIL.
-
Quite possibly.
So you believe Caprio now. Good to know.
:D
(https://media.giphy.com/media/3o7btWJxPhIfT9p5hC/giphy.gif)
JohnM
-
Nope. I stand by what I said.
-
Nope. I stand by what I said.
Whatever, Caprio's post just proves what we already know!
(https://veumagazine.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/liar_2740802b.jpg?w=620&h=387&zoom=2)
JohnM
-
"Mytton" fails again.
For "dishonest" to apply, you would have to show that
a) the statement is false
b) that I knew the statement was false at the time I made it
You have failed to show either.
-
"Mytton" fails again.
For "dishonest" to apply, you would have to show that
a) the statement is false
b) that I knew the statement was false at the time I made it
You have failed to show either.
:D
Keep digging John.
Btw what a Man, to preserve your last shred of integrity you're willing to throw Caprio under a Bus. Fk'n hilarious with every post the hole get's just gets deeper and deeper, keep it up and you'll end up in China!
JohnM
-
Keep failing, "Mytton". I know what I know. As usual, you have nothing but rhetoric.
I didn't throw anybody under the bus -- you got run over by your own speculation bus.
Again.
-
Keep failing, "Mytton". I know what I know.
Hang on let me get this straight, your opinion of why I'm failing has already been refuted but apparently you have more secret information that only you know? Holy heck, Batman!
(https://media1.tenor.com/images/710217264da49b28e4a565c1127307ae/tenor.gif?itemid=8980180)
Like I told you John, you are the gift that keeps on giving. ;D
JohnM
-
Hang on let me get this straight, your opinion of why I'm failing has already been refuted but apparently you have more secret information that only you know? Holy heck, Batman!
You haven't shown that I said anything false or that I knowingly said anything false. Nor have you "refuted" anything.
That's why you failed. You just don't know when to quit.
-
You haven't shown that I said anything false or that I knowingly said anything false. Nor have you "refuted" anything.
That's why you failed. You just don't know when to quit.
When your initial boast just happens to be directly contradicted by the man himself, then yeah what's left of your credibility takes a hit.
Btw I'm not quitting because this is way too much fun and we haven't even got to the others yet. This is going to be long road, buckle up!
JohnM
-
Aren't all these needless video links just sucking up web space again?
-
When your initial boast just happens to be directly contradicted by the man himself, then yeah what's left of your credibility takes a hit.
Except for one small problem. The man never said that Rob Caprio is not his real name, and in fact if you had been paying attention throughout the course of this forum instead of just spouting off and creating fake morphs, you would know that it's his real name.
Now, can you prove that what I said was false? If not, run along before you further embarrass yourself.
-
Aren't all these needless video links just sucking up web space again?
Yeah, he's a master at derailing any discussion about the case with his little vendettas.
-
Aren't all these needless video links just sucking up web space again?
Awwww wherever I go a little puppy is following me. How sweet!
JohnM
-
Except for one small problem. The man never said that Rob Caprio is not his real name,
Rob Caprio: I have used one name, one alias on this site. I did not register under three....
(https://i.postimg.cc/sgJrB4q2/dishonest_John.jpg)
alias
noun [ C ] UK /ˈeɪ.li.əs/ US /ˈeɪ.li.əs/
a false name, especially one used by a criminal:
He travels under (= using) an alias.
JohnM
-
Rob Caprio: I have used one name, one alias on this site. I did not register under three....
Could just as easily mean one name and one alias.
How cute that you keep trying though! :D
-
Could just as easily mean one name and one alias.
Wow talk about taking Caprio out of context and all the while inventing a new Iacoletti standard for grammar. Caprio didn't use the word "and" because he was only describing one situation, which logically led into his next statement where he denies registering under multiple names.
Btw if this is your current state of sanity then I can hardly wait till next you prove Martin and Walt are using their real names.
JohnM
-
there appears to be (imo) a contradiction in that on the one hand Oswald figures to use his own building as best way to get a rifle in a package to some floor so as be concealed yet when actually goes to the SW window at 12:15pm completely exposes himself holding a rifle in a fully open window, just standing there, holding a rifle "at the ready" position. (per Arnold Rowlands observation).
Then Oswald apparently was startled by presence of BRW at 12:15 such that Oswald must have left the 6th floor and hide on the 7th floor staircase to wait till BRW finally leaves 6th floor. Or where else could he have hidden?
Then Oswald did not go back to the SW window again, which was his 1st choice,and in fact is a pretty good window to get the closest shot at the back of JFK limo, from that 6th floor. Instead he decided go the SE window and for some reason put a box on the window ledge too, and in the end, Oswald exposed himself at the SE window too, to be seen by several witnesses, and even stuck the rifle out the window unnecessarily so far that it appeared to one witness almost 3ft of it visible.
Then Oswald (or other unknown gunman) slowly withdrew the rifle after the last shot fired.
Seems very odd to do all this exposing of himself if he was trying to be stealthy and concealed as per the reason to have chosen his own building so he would be less likely to rouse suspicion from anyone might see him carrying his package.
-
IIRC, the Paines consented to both searches. If they have your consent to search, they don't need a warrant
Baloney. Why don't you cite for this claim?
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/rFM8fJqt/John.jpg)
http://www.atheist-experience.com/people/john_iacoletti/
So you're an atheist living in Texas.
Funny (strange) when you said 'My God, I hope not' at the beginning of a show you had with Dillahunty here:
(https://i.postimg.cc/HkWkktKC/iacoletti_atheist.png)
Freudian slip, John?
'Thank God I'm an atheist', goes the old joke.
Going to church is fire insurance to some folks
;)
The greatest gift God gave us was free will. John has every right to believe in whatever he chooses. How is this relevant to the JFK assassination?
-
Yes -- is there some relevance to the JFK assassination?
Actually it was "oh gawd, I hope not". ;D
Glad you enjoy my volunteer work, but your purpose in bring that up here is...what exactly?
To distract from the fact that they have NO supporting evidence for the WC claims that they wholeheartedly support.
-
Um, because he worked at the TSBD and not the Trade Mart? Because he knew the sixth floor was scarcely populated and afforded plenty of camouflage?
Your lack of knowledge regarding the evidence is duly noted.
-
Could just as easily mean one name and one alias.
How cute that you keep trying though! :D
Rob's come and gone and not a word.
JohnM
-
So far not one believer in the official story has shown why LHO would choose his place of work where he was known to assassinate the president from. Furthermore, they have not explained why he would choose a floor that had work being done on it when the seventh floor was quiet and had a room with a door.
-
So far not one believer in the official story has shown why LHO would choose his place of work where he was known to assassinate the president from. Furthermore, they have not explained why he would choose a floor that had work being done on it when the seventh floor was quiet and had a room with a door.
why LHO would choose his place of work where he was known to assassinate the president from.
The hoax attempt in which Lee was perpetrating was intended to indicate that Lee had attempted to shoot JFK ( just as the hoax attempt at Walker's was intended to appear that Lee had tried to shoot Walker)
If the hoax attempt had been staged at some other place the Barney Fifes of Dallas would never have have picked up the trail, just as they never picked up the trail at walker's....
You may recall that Lee was disappointed when he heard on the radio that the police had thought he had escaped from Walker's by car after firing a 30.06 bullet through the window.... Lee scoffed at their ineptitude and told Marina the Barney Fifes couldn't even get the caliber of the bullet right......
-
why LHO would choose his place of work where he was known to assassinate the president from.
The hoax attempt in which Lee was perpetrating was intended to indicate that Lee had attempted to shoot JFK ( just as the hoax attempt at Walker's was intended to appear that Lee had tried to shoot Walker)
If the hoax attempt had been staged at some other place the Barney Fifes of Dallas would never have have picked up the trail, just as they never picked up the trail at walker's....
You may recall that Lee was disappointed when he heard on the radio that the police had thought he had escaped from Walker's by car after firing a 30.06 bullet through the window.... Lee scoffed at their ineptitude and told Marina the Barney Fifes couldn't even get the caliber of the bullet right......
What evidence led you to this theory? Theories are fine, but without evidence they are no better than the WC's.
-
What evidence led you to this theory? Theories are fine, but without evidence they are no better than the WC's.
Have you read much about the case? ( I mean other than the fiction like Roger Craig's account)
-
Btw if this is your current state of sanity then I can hardly wait till next you prove Martin and Walt are using their real names.
I don't have to prove anything. You accused me of being dishonest. And you've utterly failed to demonstrate that I have been dishonest.
-
Have you read much about the case? ( I mean other than the fiction like Roger Craig's account)
LOL. He should prefer Walt's fiction instead?
-
I don't have to prove anything. You accused me of being dishonest. And you've utterly failed to demonstrate that I have been dishonest.
Hahaha!
This is how it works buddy, you said that Walt, Rob and Martin all use their real names, how you could possibly know this is not known but you said that you "know"? Anyway for starters your plan backfired because Rob's post that you thought was deleted along with his account was actually preserved as a quote within my post. Oops!
Rob says that he uses one alias and then goes on to support this statement by saying that he doesn't use multiple names, thus proving that you were being dishonest.
(https://i.postimg.cc/sgJrB4q2/dishonest_John.jpg)
Btw Walt and Rob who usually pounce on me are right here and doing their best to stay away from your absurd claims. So until we see some sort of proof that your mates are not using aliases then your status as Dishonest John will only strengthen.
Waiting......
JohnM
-
This is how it works buddy,
No, that's not how it works, "buddy". You're being dishonest about what "dishonest" means just like your buddy "Richard".
Dishonest would mean both that I made a statement that is false, and that I knew it was false at the time I made it. You haven't demonstrated either.
You also are playing mindreader by claiming that I "thought Rob's post was deleted" with no evidence of that either.
If it turns out that I'm mistaken about anybody's real names, I will admit that I was mistaken. That still wouldn't get you to "dishonest". I don't think I'm mistaken though.
And I don't blame Rob for laying low on this forum where people in the past have dredged up old resumes in order to try to attack and mock him. As for Walt, he's already criticized people who use fake names.
With that, stop derailing multiple threads with your petty vendettas.
-
Dishonest would mean both that I made a statement that is false, and that I knew it was false at the time I made it. You haven't demonstrated either.
Oops!
Nope. I stand by what I said.
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/E39GIysMevQ/maxresdefault.jpg)
JohnM
-
Oops!
Is that supposed to be a demonstration? :D
Unless you can come up with anything, stop derailing multiple threads with your petty vendettas.
-
Unless you can come up with anything
Come up with what?
A lot of people here use their real names. Walt, Rob, Martin, and me. But also DVP, Paul May, Bill Brown. It's just the gutless trolls who don't want to take any responsibility for their actions who hide behind aliases.
From the start it's always been your claim that Rob, Martin and Walt are using their real names and you even went on to proudly boast that "I stand by what I said", now prove it. Or admit that you were lying.
Nope. I stand by what I said.
JohnM
-
Come up with what?, from the start it's always been your claim that Rob, Martin and Walt are using their real names and you even went on to proudly boast that "I stand by what I said", now prove it. Or admit that you were lying.
JohnM
I can verify that one of those men is in fact NOT using an alias..... Think about it....If a person were using an alias they would choose a name like Smith, or Brown, (anybody here by those names?) or Jones, or Williams .....They sure as hell would not use an unusual and easily remembered name like Cakebread.
-
I can verify that one of those men is in fact NOT using an alias..... Think about it....If a person were using an alias they would choose a name like Smith, or Brown, (anybody here by those names?) or Jones, or Williams .....They sure as hell would not use an unusual and easily remembered name like Cakebread.
They sure as hell would not use an unusual and easily remembered name like Cakebread.
Incredible how the standard of accepted evidence that Iacoletti and yourself are using to support your "real name" claim bears absolutely no resemblance to the demands you two make in the JFK case. Hypocrites!
Btw after Iacoletti threw Caprio under a bus, if you want to prove that you really are Walt Cakebread then show us something like your drivers license or your birth certificate and of course delete anything too personal, just so Iacoletti can at least prove a fraction of his claim.
JohnM
-
Actually it was "oh gawd, I hope not". ;D
Gawd is used to represent the word 'God' pronounced in a particular accent or tone of voice, especially to show that someone is bored, irritated, or shocked.
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/gawd
Gawd in British
(ɡɔːd)
exclamation
British informal (often not capital)
God
My Gawd!
I thought, oh my gawd!
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/gawd
Gawd
EXCLAMATION
informal
God (used for emphasis or to express surprise, anger, etc.)
?Oh Gawd! I'd completely forgotten about it?
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/gawd
JohnM
-
Have you read much about the case? ( I mean other than the fiction like Roger Craig's account)
Have you read the twenty-six volumes? I doubt it based on your posts.
-
Incredible how the standard of accepted evidence that Iacoletti and yourself are using to support your "real name" claim bears absolutely no resemblance to the demands you two make in the JFK case. Hypocrites!
As if Walt doesn't know his own name? Now you're just being ridiculous.
Admit that you have no basis for calling me dishonest, or run along.
-
I can verify that one of those men is in fact NOT using an alias..... Think about it....If a person were using an alias they would choose a name like Smith, or Brown, (anybody here by those names?) or Jones, or Williams .....They sure as hell would not use an unusual and easily remembered name like Cakebread.
Known variations of the Cakebread family name include Cakebread, Cacabred, Cakebred, Cacabread, Cakbred, Cakebrede and many more.
'Cacabread' suits you best, Waldo
-
So apparently it made sense for the real assassin to pick the TSBD but not Oswald. Derp.
-
Known variations of the Cakebread family name include Cakebread, Cacabred, Cakebred, Cacabread, Cakbred, Cakebrede and many more.
'Cacabread' suits you best, Waldo
That's not my name A hole ....
-
So apparently it made sense for the real assassin to pick the TSBD but not Oswald. Derp.
Why are you assuming that one person killed JFK?
-
Seems your 'gawd' is Richard Dawkins
Where in the world did you get that? Oh yeah, you just made it up. Big surprise.
>>> https://www.salon.com/2014/08/09/i_spent_a_day_watching_atheisttv_and_it_was_horrifying/
EXCERPT: The recently-launched AtheistTV, which is available over the Internet and through the Roku streaming device, frames itself as an outreach project of sorts. It consists of acquired programming (for instance, from the Richard Dawkins Institute)
(...)
Just evidence, rather than unsupported claims. That's all it takes. If you had it, you wouldn't need to divert with "reasonable people" and "over-the-top" excuses.
>>> See above
-
Oswald being known there (TSBD) was the advantage that location had over all others. Isn't that obvious to you?
Of course, it should be obvious, how else could he have been framed. Ver very important part is the location
-
Happenstance of history. Oswald obviously never planned to go back to the TSBD. He was heading for Cuba. "Hey Fidel I killed JFK for you".
-
Where in the world did you get that? Oh yeah, you just made it up. Big surprise.
>>> https://www.salon.com/2014/08/09/i_spent_a_day_watching_atheisttv_and_it_was_horrifying/
EXCERPT: The recently-launched AtheistTV, which is available over the Internet and through the Roku streaming device, frames itself as an outreach project of sorts. It consists of acquired programming (for instance, from the Richard Dawkins Institute)
(...)
How is that supposed to make Richard Dawkins my gawd? You’re making less and less sense every minute.
-
How is that supposed to make Richard Dawkins my gawd? You’re making less and less sense every minute.
Chill. I said nothing about you. You asked where I got the Dawkins thing. You accused me of making the Dawkins thing up. I showed you where I got the Dawkins thing. That's it.
-
. Oswald obviously never planned to go back to the TSBD. He was heading for Cuba.
Speculation
-
Chill. I said nothing about you.
(https://cdn2.iconfinder.com/data/icons/smileys-people-hand-gestures-add-on/48/v-16-512.png)
Seems your 'gawd' is Richard Dawkins ;D
-
How is that supposed to make Richard Dawkins my gawd? You’re making less and less sense every minute.
gawd LOL
Iacoletti arrives at The Pearly Gates
God appears
Iacoletti: 'I'd like to talk to Lee Harvey Oswald'
God says 'You missed your stop. You want The Gates of Hell
A cold chill runs through Iacoletti, and he almost faints... and does a #2
He manages to stutter 'b-b-but why, gawd?
God says 'the little spombleprofglidnoctobuns killed Kennedy and Tippit'
Iacoletti replies 'WOW, I had no idea that the lies went THIS high'
-
And just when I think Chapman couldn't get any more...irreverent [for lack of any other word]---
gawd LOL
Iacoletti arrives at The Pearly Gates
God appears
Iacoletti: 'I'd like to talk to Lee Harvey Oswald'
God says 'You missed your stop. You want The Gates of Hell
A cold chill runs through Iacoletti, and he almost faints... and does a #2
He manages to stutter 'b-b-but why, gawd?
God says 'the little spombleprofglidnoctobuns killed Kennedy and Tippit'
Iacoletti replies 'WOW, I had no idea that the lies went THIS high'
I guess we're supposed to chuckle at all of his impius contributions which he has made before in triplicate? ::)
-
Dealey Plaza was the stage to do three things at once - set up the fake sniper lair, accuse Oswald because he worked there after all, and do the actual shooting.
Times were different then. Security was not what it is today with armored limos and body scanners to get even 20 feet close to a president. Watch the Love Field footage and you'll see what I mean. There was more of an up close and personal vibe between a president and the crowds. Kennedy even pulled over during the Dallas motorcade and shook some nuns' hands. And look at the photos of the parade where an open bus with people are looking down on him. This was not lax security - it was simply the way it was done back then.
If Oswald really was the leftist crazy that he's been painted to be over 50 plus years - in other words if he really did want to make a statement about his hatred for all things America - he could have done this murder in a much more showy manner. Hinkley did it to RR; Bremer did it to Wallace. And why did Oswald take his supposed shots as the car was going away from him? He had very easy shots as the car was coming down Houston toward him. The whole series of events was a sham and implausible.
And, oh yeah, if he really wanted to make a statement, he would have thrown his USMC ring away years before 11/22. But there he is being paraded around in DPD with his ring on.
-
Dealey Plaza was the stage to do three things at once - set up the fake sniper lair, accuse Oswald because he worked there after all, and do the actual shooting.
Times were different then. Security was not what it is today with armored limos and body scanners to get even 20 feet close to a president. Watch the Love Field footage and you'll see what I mean. There was more of an up close and personal vibe between a president and the crowds. Kennedy even pulled over during the Dallas motorcade and shook some nuns' hands. And look at the photos of the parade where an open bus with people are looking down on him. This was not lax security - it was simply the way it was done back then.
If Oswald really was the leftist crazy that he's been painted to be over 50 plus years - in other words if he really did want to make a statement about his hatred for all things America - he could have done this murder in a much more showy manner. Hinkley did it to RR; Bremer did it to Wallace. And why did Oswald take his supposed shots as the car was going away from him? He had very easy shots as the car was coming down Houston toward him. The whole series of events was a sham and implausible.
And, oh yeah, if he really wanted to make a statement, he would have thrown his USMC ring away years before 11/22. But there he is being paraded around in DPD with his ring on.
How did that work out for Hinkley and Bremer then? Oh yeah, they both failed. :D :D :D
-
How did that work out for Hinkley and Bremer then? Oh yeah, they both failed. :D :D :D
Yeah, what you're basically trying to do here, Dennis, is to say just because it didn't work for those two then Oswald would obviously not do it that way. Because yeah, he had every reason to think he could pull off an absolute perfect feat of marksmanship like the guv wants suckers like you to believe. And believe it, you do. And yeah, he kills the president, leaves the shells (oops), stuffs the gun away, quits work, guns down a police officer, throws one of his 4 wallets down at the scene, empties his gun, throws his jacket away, buys popcorn and goes to a movie. Some raving leftist Commie trying to make a statement, huh, Dennis?
But what about Booth? What about the guy that walked up to FDR's car and killed the mayor of Chicago...what about them, huh, Dennis? Worked out great for them, right? Your argument here makes no sense.
And care to comment on the ring, Dennis? Nary a word from you on that one. You see, Dennis, there has to be some logic here, Dennis. It makes no sense for a man to be going around, one who supposedly killed the president and doing so to make a political statement (like Booth did) and then still be wearing his military ring, a ring that represents everything that this supposed Commie nut is supposed to hate.
Hell, even Castro didn't think Oswald could have pulled off his remarkable feat LOL:
https://ourhiddenhistory.org/entry/fidel-castro-s-second-speech-on-the-jfk-assassination-11-27-1963
-
Yeah, what you're basically trying to do here, Dennis, is to say just because it didn't work for those two then Oswald would obviously not do it that way. Because yeah, he had every reason to think he could pull off an absolute perfect feat of marksmanship like the guv wants suckers like you to believe. And believe it, you do. And yeah, he kills the president, leaves the shells (oops), stuffs the gun away, quits work, guns down a police officer, throws one of his 4 wallets down at the scene, empties his gun, throws his jacket away, buys popcorn and goes to a movie. Some raving leftist Commie trying to make a statement, huh, Dennis?
But what about Booth? What about the guy that walked up to FDR's car and killed the mayor of Chicago...what about them, huh, Dennis? Worked out great for them, right? Your argument here makes no sense.
And care to comment on the ring, Dennis? Nary a word from you on that one. You see, Dennis, there has to be some logic here, Dennis. It makes no sense for a man to be going around, one who supposedly killed the president and doing so to make a political statement (like Booth did) and then still be wearing his military ring, a ring that represents everything that this supposed Commie nut is supposed to hate.
Hell, even Castro didn't think Oswald could have pulled off his remarkable feat LOL:
https://ourhiddenhistory.org/entry/fidel-castro-s-second-speech-on-the-jfk-assassination-11-27-1963
Well, no actually, I'm not saying anything like that, "basically" or otherwise. You presume a hell of a lot, don't you? Which no doubt accounts for your many mistakes. What I am saying is that using Hinkley and Bremer as examples of how Oswald should have assassinated Kennedy, wasn't very bright considering both failed. LOL Oswald had an advantage over all the assassins you mention in that only Oswald had been trained to shoot a rifle in USMC. What a totally stupid idea that Oswald shouldn't use that training and instead just run up to Kennedy's limo, surrounded by SS men, on the hope of getting a shot off! A shot that even if on target would probably have just wounded Kennedy. Where on Earth do you get your brains from? You're certainly not the brightest match in the box, are you? LOL Castro? Are you saying just because Castro didn't believe the shots possible then they couldn't have been? Are you an admirer of Castro? Is he your hero? Do you take Castro's words as gospel?
Oswald's USMC ring? Oswald was a show-off, he knew that wearing that ring gave him a certain amount of prestige, impressed people, maybe even got him a few freebies. The fact that Oswald was dishonourably discharged shows what a hypocrite he was, what an absolute fake he was. Going back to your misguided presumptions, your compleat argument is based on your 'presumption' that Oswald's reason for assassinating Kennedy was that he was making a political "statement", where did you get that gem from, Castro? lol Can you prove that Oswald's motive was so 'meaningful'? Personally, I don't believe it was. I think the guy was just bat-spombleprofglidnoctobuns crazy.
PS If you insist on using my name every other sentence then at least try to spell it correctly. Did you just presume it was spelt with two 'n' or do you have a reading difficulty? :D :D :D
-
Because yeah, he had every reason to think he could pull off an absolute perfect feat of marksmanship like the guv wants suckers like you to believe. And believe it, you do.
Wasn't perfect he missed the first shot. He also missed Walker.
Oswald fired 4 shots at people with that rifle and missed two of them.
-
Wasn't perfect he missed the first shot. He also missed Walker.
Oswald fired 4 shots at people with that rifle and missed two of them.
It wasn't even as good as that TED, if Oswald was going for the headshot on Kennedy he missed twice!
-
Wasn't perfect he missed the first shot. He also missed Walker.
Oswald fired 4 shots at people with that rifle and missed two of them.
How do you know Oswald didn't shoot at any others in his lifetime?
-
How do you know Oswald didn't shoot at any others in his lifetime?
Because theres no evidence for it. To my knowledge anyway.
-
Wasn't perfect he missed the first shot. He also missed Walker. Oswald fired 4 shots at people with that rifle and missed two of them.
Oh my! Well, you left out Tippit..don't forget him. Supposed amateur professional hit man Oswald allegedly performed a coup d' gras and made sure that this was one cop who would never speak again. Any ideas why?
-
Oh my! Well, you left out Tippit..don't forget him. Supposed amateur professional hit man Oswald allegedly performed a coup d' gras and made sure that this was one cop who would never speak again. Any ideas why?
Ted said: "4 shots at people with that rifle". Reading problem? As to why, anybody that shoots a wounded/dead man who's no longer a threat is obviously a coldhearted, sadistic psycho..perfect description of Oswald?
-
As to why, anybody that shoots a wounded/dead man who's no longer a threat is obviously a coldhearted, sadistic psycho..perfect description of Oswald?
Not really perfect at all. But you are free to speculate. Supposedly, the killer of the cop was trying to get away. So fugitives don't do that..they just get away.
Round and round over and over..Because he was a cold blooded killer Oswald did it...Oswald did it because he was a cold blooded killer.
When did he start this murderous life? There is still no absolute proof that Oswald ever shot anybody.
-
Not really perfect at all. But you are free to speculate. Supposedly, the killer of the cop was trying to get away. So fugitives don't do that..they just get away.
Round and round over and over..Because he was a cold blooded killer Oswald did it...Oswald did it because he was a cold blooded killer.
When did he start this murderous life? There is still no absolute proof that Oswald ever shot anybody.
Who could know for sure except Oswald? As a result, the question you asked necessitates speculation. Simply because we can't enter his mind to answer that question with certainty doesn't eliminate the evidence or create doubt of his guilt as you erroneously imply. But if you want speculation, Tippit is armed. If Oswald is not absolutely certain that he is dead or incapacitated, he still poses a potential danger. So Oswald finished him off. Better than getting shot in the back as he walks away.
-
How do you know Oswald didn't shoot at any others in his lifetime?
How does Ted know that Oswald shot at anybody in his lifetime, for that matter?
-
Who could know for sure except Oswald? As a result, the question you asked necessitates speculation. Simply because we can't enter his mind to answer that question with certainty doesn't eliminate the evidence or create doubt of his guilt as you erroneously imply. But if you want speculation, Tippit is armed. If Oswald is not absolutely certain that he is dead or incapacitated, he still poses a potential danger. So Oswald finished him off. Better than getting shot in the back as he walks away.
A speculation spectacle spectacular! (http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/Clapping.gif) Bravo! BTW...according to the official timeline--Oswald shot himself in the Marine Corps.
-
Oh my! Well, you left out Tippit..don't forget him. Supposed amateur professional hit man Oswald allegedly performed a coup d' gras and made sure that this was one cop who would never speak again. Any ideas why?
Why is it that you think adding "coup d'gras" means that a run of the mill scumbag that has already shot someone couldn't possibly perform that task unless he was a professional hitman?
-
Oswald ultimately shot himself in the foot that day
-
Wasn't perfect he missed the first shot. He also missed Walker.
Oswald fired 4 shots at people with that rifle and missed two of them.
And you believe it. My favorite that everyone witnessed was how man was able to shoot another man who was surrounded by 70 armed officers. I bet you think that was organic
-
And you believe it. My favorite that everyone witnessed was how man was able to shoot another man who was surrounded by 70 armed officers. I bet you think that was organic
Anyone could have shot Oswald at any point over the weekend. The DJ John Peel was in the station. He wasnt a DJ at the time. Security was so poor back then,
https://peel.fandom.com/wiki/John_F._Kennedy
The myth of government, institutional and police competency.
-
A speculation spectacle spectacular! (http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/Clapping.gif) Bravo! BTW...according to the official timeline--Oswald shot himself in the Marine Corps.
I can't decipher a coherent point from your rambling response. You asked why Oswald paused to shoot Tippit in the head. A question that calls, by necessity, for speculation since only Oswald knows for sure. After that was explained to you, you criticize the response for being speculative. And start babbling incoherently about Oswald's time in the USMC. Weird. This kind of cognitive dissonance perhaps explains why you are a CTer in the first place and can never be dissuaded by any amount of facts, logic, or common sense. It is like trying to convince a small child that there is no Santa Claus. Almost cruel to see CTer hysterics when their fantasy starts to come unraveled. It's like taking away their security blanket.
-
Anyone could have shot Oswald at any point over the weekend. The DJ John Peel was in the station. He wasnt a DJ at the time. Security was so poor back then,
https://peel.fandom.com/wiki/John_F._Kennedy
The myth of government, institutional and police competency.
Here's an example of that stellar security. And at any time he could have exposed the plot that he was in on. Or that he believed set him up. So, why the silence?
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/ba/20/30/ba20301fc647e6f1aa5265bb4d1cead0--dealey-plaza-kennedy-assassination.jpg)
-
Here's an example of that stellar security. And at any time he could have exposed the plot that he was in on. Or that he believed set him up. So, why the silence?
Probably because there was no plot.
-
Anyone could have shot Oswald at any point over the weekend. The DJ John Peel was in the station. He wasnt a DJ at the time. Security was so poor back then,
https://peel.fandom.com/wiki/John_F._Kennedy
The myth of government, institutional and police competency.
Good one. Anyone could do it. So that is your logic, of course, it makes the impossible possible. But will just talk what is possible, like Ruby was there the whole weekend. Every day ends in a "y" Sunday is as good as Friday or Saturday, right?. Ruby is Jewish, Sunday is after the Sabbath, the picture is so much clearer.
Turning to the assassination of JFK. Security was different then. There is a problem, who shot Kennedy, we know Oswald didn't and we know the two men shot in the limo have wounds that did not come from an alleged assassin in the SFW And we know it never has been done even in a loose reenactment or can someone who was not there do something that didn't happen there? Better find a different window, bush, fence, tree, or maybe a drone. I don't think the driver did but what is to say he didn't? Common sense, right? And I agree but the same common sense says Oswald did not shot the Gov or the Prez. Very reasonable I am
-
Why Would LHO Choose His Workplace As The Location For Shooting JFK?
How did LHO choose the TSBD as his workplace?
JFK AND THE UNSPEAKABLE
Why He Died and Why It Matters
by James W. Douglas
page 47
"In that March 29, 1977, interview, the last he would ever give, George de Mohrenschildt told author
Edward Jay Epstein he had "on occasion done favors" since the early 1950s for goverment officials
connected with the CIA. It was a mutually beneficial relationship. The CIA contacts then helped
de Mohrenschildt arrange profital business connections overseas.
De Mohrenschildt said that in late 1961 he had met in Dallas with the CIA's J. Walton Moore, who
began to tell him about "an ex-American Marine who had worked in an electronics factory in Minsk
for the past year and in whom there was "interest". The Baron had grown up in Minsk, as Moore seemed
to know before being told. The ex-Marine, Moore said, would be returning to the Dallas area. De
Mohrenschildt felt he was being primed.
In the summer of 1962, de Mohrenschildt said, he was handed Lee Harvey Oswald's address in Fort Worth
by "one of Moore's associates," who suggested that de Mohrenschildt meet Oswald. De Mohrenschildt
then phoned Moore to confirm such a mission and set up another mutually beneficial relationship. He
told Moore he would appreciate help from the U.S. embassy in Haiti in arranging approval by Haitian
dictator "Papa Doc" Duvalier for an oil exploration deal. Moore then gave de Mohrenschildt the go-ahead
to befriend the Oswlds, which de Mohrenschildt promptly did--with the firm understanding that he was
carrying out the CIA's wishes. "I would never have contacted Oswald in a million years if Moore had
not sanctioned it," de Mohrenschildt said in his final interview. "Too much was at stake."
On October 7, 1962, nine days before the Cuban Missle Crisis began, de Mohrenschildt urged his new
friend Lee Harvey Oswald to move to Dallas, where more of the Russian immigrants lived. Oswald took
him so seriuosly that the next day he quit his job at a Fort Worth welding company and made the
move. De Mohrenschildt then became Oswald's mentor in Dallas. The Baron's wife and daughter said it
was he who organized Oswald's securing a new job, four days after his move, with a Dallas graphic
arts compoany. Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall."
~snip~
p.177
"On October 9, 1963, one week before Lee Harvey Oswald began his job at a site overlooking the president's future parade route,
an FBI official in Washington, D.C., disconnected Oswald from a federal alarm system that was about to identify him as a threat to
national security. The FBI man's name was Marvin Gheesling. He was a supervisor in the Soviet espionage section at FBI headquarters.
His timing was remarkable. As author John Newman remarked in an analysis of this phenomenon, Gheesling "turned off the alarm switch
on Oswald literally an instant before it would have gone off."
~snip~
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/oct_63-08.jpg)
--------------------
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/painetsbd1.gif)
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/painetsbd2.gif)
-
Doesn?t this strike anyone as quite odd? I mean generally if you want to try and get away with a crime I would imagine it would help to do it where NO ONE KNOWS WHO YOU ARE! In 1963 they did NOT have the type of equipment they have now to quickly ID you and track you via GPS and other methods, so if you are unknown this greatly increases your chances of getting away with it! As for the claim of ?Well he wanted to be famous? we have to go by his behavior after he was arrested! Did it strike anyone as wanting to be famous?
Also, the excuse DVP gave me years ago for not committing the crime at Love Field was that he couldn?t get his rifle there without being seen! First of all, he didn?t need ?his? rifle (something I don?t think ever existed by the way) as he could have used a pistol instead and that could have easily been hidden from a cab driver (much better than a bus scenario as again it creates less people who can remember you).
Secondly, don?t you think the SAME logic applies to getting a ride from Wes Frazier and then lugging the rifle two to three blocks to the TSBD and then lugging it around until you hide it in the TSBD for later use? These were people who KNEW you too by sight and in some cases by NAME!
Also, it would seem DP was a much tougher place to get away from. At the airport he could have dropped the gun and disappeared into the crowd and then even got on a flight out of town. This sounds much more plausible than the OFFICIAL scenario to me.
When one adds in the fact LHO was NOT very good with a rifle this would seem to make this the ONLY scenario to me.
What are your thoughts on this?
Oswald was plenty good with a rifle.
But to answer your question ("Why would LHO choose his workplace as the location for shooting JFK?"), maybe because the TSBD was a tall building on the motorcade route, he had access to the building (he worked there), there were boxes to hide behind on the sixth floor, etc?
Gosh, I dunno.
-- MWT ;)
-
Oswald was plenty good with a rifle.
But to answer your question ("Why would LHO choose his workplace as the location for shooting JFK?"), maybe because the TSBD was a tall building on the motorcade route, he had access to the building (he worked there), there were boxes to hide behind on the sixth floor, etc?
Gosh, I dunno.
-- MWT ;)
I figured out how Oswald did not hit Walker - because he did not even attempt to. That was an easy answer. People waste too much time on the stuff he was not guilty of, just like the assassination, he never shot at the limo.
-
I figured out how Oswald did not hit Walker - because he did not even attempt to. That was an easy answer. People waste too much time on the stuff he was not guilty of, just like the assassination, he never shot at the limo.
"I figured out how Oswald did not hit Walker - because he did not even attempt to."
Bravo!!, You're right, Peter.... Lee did not try to hit Walker ( If Walker was actually in that room when lee put he bullet through the window) The whole affair was a hoax to make it appear that Lee had tried to shoot one of Castro's most vocal foes...
"People waste too much time on the stuff he was not guilty of, just like the assassination, he never shot at the limo."
It's definitely NOT a waste of time for the government agents who are assigned to propagate the official tale, as released by the US government in the Warren Report.
-
Oswald was plenty good with a rifle.
But to answer your question ("Why would LHO choose his workplace as the location for shooting JFK?"), maybe because the TSBD was a tall building on the motorcade route, he had access to the building (he worked there), there were boxes to hide behind on the sixth floor, etc?
Gosh, I dunno.
-- MWT ;)
Oswald was plenty good with a rifle.
What a self serving and ambiguous statement..... It's akin to saying that you're plenty good with driving a car so you think you'll enter the Indy 500....
-
Oswald was plenty good with a rifle.
What a self serving and ambiguous statement..... It's akin to saying that you're plenty good with driving a car so you think you'll enter the Indy 500....
Oswald was rated above average by marine standards which by genpop standards would be excellent
-
Oswald was rated above average by marine standards which by genpop standards would be excellent
Oswald was trained with an M-1 Garand which is nothing like a bolt action carcano.... Simply because he qualified with an M-1 does not mean he was qualified as anything above a novice with the Carcano.... You may be qualified to operate a Chevrolet as an expert but I doubt that you could drive one lap in a NASCAR Chevy.
-
Oswald was trained with an M-1 Garand which is nothing like a bolt action carcano.... Simply because he qualified with an M-1 does not mean he was qualified as anything above a novice with the Carcano.... You may be qualified to operate a Chevrolet as an expert but I doubt that you could drive one lap in a NASCAR Chevy.
Hey Walt, Bill's going to argue Oswald was an avid driver.
-
Oswald was rated above average by marine standards which by genpop standards would be excellent
Ozzie was considered a rather poor shot by the Marine Corp.
They said so in a letter sent from the Marine Corp commandant to the WC.
-
Ozzie was considered a rather poor shot by the Marine Corp.
They said so in a letter sent from the Marine Corp commandant to the WC.
There are no "poor shots" in the Marines.
They train on targets 200, 300, and 500 yards away.
https://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/marine-corps-weapons-qualification-course.html
The fatal head shot was about 75 yards from the sniper's next (on the sixth floor of the TSBD), iirc.
-- MWT
-
There are no "poor shots" in the Marines.
They train on targets 200, 300, and 500 yards away.
https://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/marine-corps-weapons-qualification-course.html
The fatal head shot was about 75 yards from the sniper's next (on the sixth floor of the TSBD), iirc.
-- MWT
Notice on 6May59 at MCAS El Toro on the "B" course he scored 191 with an M1.
Also notice that 191 is the lowest score you can get and still qualify for the lowest skill level 'Marksman".
"The Marine Corps is of the opinion...…….a low "Marksman" qualification indicates a rather poor "shot".
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/anderson.jpg)
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/anderson2.jpg)
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/anderson3.jpg)
-
Notice on 6May59 at MCAS El Toro on the "B" course he scored 191 with an M1.
Also notice that 191 is the lowest score you can get and still qualify for the lowest skill level 'Marksman".
"The Marine Corps is of the opinion...…….a low "Marksman" qualification indicates a rather poor "shot".
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/anderson.jpg)
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/anderson2.jpg)
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/anderson3.jpg)
Craig,
Sorry to burst your bubble, but like they say, "everything is relative".
There are no "poor shots" (by civilian standards) in the Marine Corps.
-- MWT ;)
-
Craig,
Sorry to burst your bubble, but like they say, "everything is relative".
There are no "poor shots" (by civilian standards) in the Marine Corps.
-- MWT ;)
I don't think you need to worry about bursting anyone's bubble.
The Marine Corp considered LHO a "rather poor shot" shooting at stationary targets with a well maintained M1.
JFK was a moving target.
The Carcano was a worn, rusty WW11 military surplus rifle with a misaligned scope, sticky bolt and 2 stage hair trigger.
-
Craig,
Sorry to burst your bubble, but like they say, "everything is relative".
There are no "poor shots" (by civilian standards) in the Marine Corps.
-- MWT ;)
Relative would be if Oswald had done it, but since we know he did not relative does not apply.
-
Relative would be if Oswald had done it, but since we know he did not relative does not apply.
Sounds like wishful thinking on your part, Kleinschmidt.
-- MWT ;)
-
When assessing Oswald's rifle skills two factors need to be taking into account: Reguly army qualifies on 300m targets. USMC qualify on 500m targets. Also, qualification standards are tougher in the USMC.
As you can see from the scoring below, scoring marksman in the Marines is pretty close to scoring sharpshooter in the Army, but qualifying expert is about the same in the Army & Marines.
Army:
23/40 (57%) = marksman
30/40 (75%) = sharpshooter
36/40 (90%) = expert
Marines:
190/250 (76%) = marksman
210/250 (84%) = sharpshooter
220/250 (88%) = expert
Oswald was a good shot not only compared to civilians but also compared to regular army rifleman.
Oswald's first rifle scores and Charles Whitmans USMC rifle scores are pretty much identical. On 1st August 1966, Whitman shot dead 11 people and wounded 31 others, from 28 floors up. Although Whitman's weapons were far superior to Oswald's and can't be compared, this does show that claiming Oswald to be a 'bad' shot based on his USMC qualification scores is prepositions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman
“Every Marine a Rifleman”
-
Regarding the off topic post above..every marine recruit in that era was required to qualify with rifle skills [M1 carbine]...if they had to stay up all night...every night to do it. The idea that to qualify once made someone a crack shot for life with any old crappy rifle at all is ludicrous ::)
-
Regarding the off topic post above..every marine recruit in that era was required to qualify with rifle skills [M1 carbine]...if they had to stay up all night...every night to do it. The idea that to qualify once made someone a crack shot for life with any old crappy rifle at all is ludicrous ::)
Considering there's twelve post's before mine discussing Oswald's rifle shooting capability...get over it. Who claimed, "that to qualify once made someone a crack shot for life"? Certainly not me (did you just pull that out your ass) but as a POI, Oswald made his best rifle scores after being in the USMC for only two weeks. Which suggests Oswald was either naturally gifted or he was already proficient with a rifle. Perhaps the condition of Oswald's weapon explains why someone as proficient as Oswald only hit the 'target' (Kennedy's head) once out of three shots over such a relatively short distance. You do know one shot didn't even hit the limo, right? The only thing "ludicrous" is the often repeated claim that Oswald wasn't capable of making the assassination shots based on his USMC scorecard!
Please show some proof to back up your claim that any USMC recruit was ever forced to "stay up all night...every night" until he qualified!! Sounds like pure BS to me.
-
In a letter sent to the WC by Lieutenant Colonel A. G. Folsom Jr. the Marine Corps state they are of the opinion that someone
scoring 191 to qualify a marksman, as LHO did , is considered a rather poor shot.
A.G. FOLSOM, JR.
Lieutenant Colonel U.S. Marine Corps
Head, Records Branch, Personnel Department
By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps
"...The Marine Corps considers that any reasonable application of the instructions given to Marines should
permit them to become qualified at least as marksman. To become qualified as sharpshooter, the Marine Corps is of the
opinion that most Marines with a reasonable amount of adaptability to weapons firing can become so qualified. Consequently
a low marksman qualification indicates a rather poor "shot" and a sharpshooter qualification indicates a
fairly good "shot". I trust the foregoing will serve the purpose of your inquiry..."
The Warren Commission brought in two career military men, Major Anderson and Sgt. James A. Zahm from the Marine Corp to testify
that LHO was a better than average shot and could have easily made the 11/22/63 shots that killed JFK.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 21, 1956, using a M-1, firing at targets at 200, 300, and 500 yds, he scored 212. 210 is the lowest score to qualify a sharpshooter.
WC expert, Major Anderson, gave the following reasons for LHO qualifying as a sharpshooter.
"Yes; the day the 212 was fired appears to be according to the record book to have been an ideal day under firing conditions."
"Yes; when he fired that he had just completed a very intensive preliminary training period."
"He had the services of an experienced highly trained coach."
"He had high motivation."
"He had presumably a good to excellent rifle and good ammunition."
On May6, 1959, using a M-1, firing at a stationary target at 200 yds, he scored 191. This is the lowest possible score he could get and still qualify as a marksman.
WC expert, Major Anderson, gave the following reasons as possibilities of why LHO scored so low.
"It might well have been a bad day for firing the rifle windy, rainy, dark."
"There is some possibility that the rifle he was firing might not have been as good a rifle as the rifle that he was firing in his A course firing, because may well have carried this rifle for quite some time, and it got banged around in normal usage."
"There is little probability that he had a good, expert coach, and he probably didn't have as high a motivation because he was no longer in recruit training and under the care of the drill instructor."
----------------------------
11/22/63
LHO is 4 yrs removed from any kind of firearms training or coaching.
How much farther had his shooting skills eroded?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this video, Mark Lane interviews Sgt. Nelson Delgado, who served in the Marines with Lee Harvey Oswald. Sgt. Delgado describes Oswald's lack of shooting skill on the rifle range and how the FBI tried to pressure him to say Oswald was a good shot.
------------------------------
http://www.jfk-assassination.de/warren/wch/vol11/page301.php (http://www.jfk-assassination.de/warren/wch/vol11/page301.php)
http://www.jmasland.com/wctestimony/usmc/zahm.htm (http://www.jmasland.com/wctestimony/usmc/zahm.htm)
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/anderson1.htm (http://jfkassassination.net/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/anderson1.htm)
-
Oswald had been out of the Marines much much longer than Whitman.
-
When assessing Oswald's rifle skills two factors need to be taking into account: Reguly army qualifies on 300m targets. USMC qualify on 500m targets. Also, qualification standards are tougher in the USMC.
As you can see from the scoring below, scoring marksman in the Marines is pretty close to scoring sharpshooter in the Army, but qualifying expert is about the same in the Army & Marines.
Army:
23/40 (57%) = marksman
30/40 (75%) = sharpshooter
36/40 (90%) = expert
Marines:
190/250 (76%) = marksman
210/250 (84%) = sharpshooter
220/250 (88%) = expert
Oswald was a good shot not only compared to civilians but also compared to regular army rifleman.
Oswald's first rifle scores and Charles Whitmans USMC rifle scores are pretty much identical. On 1st August 1966, Whitman shot dead 11 people and wounded 31 others, from 28 floors up. Although Whitman's weapons were far superior to Oswald's and can't be compared, this does show that claiming Oswald to be a 'bad' shot based on his USMC qualification scores is prepositions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman
“Every Marine a Rifleman”
I can't find the part where the marine's training facilities are downtown. Plus, there isn't nearly enough room on the sixth floor for so many marines and there's only one window to shoot from. Don't forget it is also a different weapon.
-
Cts love to show the Lane-Delgado interview where Delgado mocks Oswald's shooting skills, they don't like to show this one so much: In it Delgado openly states that although Oswald scored so low (191) he believes Oswald was a better shot than that and the reason for the low score was because he'd completely lost interest in the USMC and was about to leave.
Another interesting fact, (not stated in interview) Oswald and Degado qualified on the same day, at the same range. Unlike Oswald, Degado loved serving in the USMC, again, unlike Oswald, Degado was enthusiastically trying to get as high a score as possible. Oswald scored 191 Degado scored 192!!
John Iacoletti stated earlier: "Oswald had been out of the Marines much much longer than Whitman." Oswald committed his murders four years after leaving the Corps. Whitman committed his murders two years after being discharged. I guess the term "much much longer" is subjective.
-
Cts love to show the Lane-Delgado interview where Delgado mocks Oswald's shooting skills, they don't like to show this one so much: In it Delgado openly states that although Oswald scored so low (191) he believes Oswald was a better shot than that and the reason for the low score was because he'd completely lost interest in the USMC and was about to leave.
Another interesting fact, (not stated in interview) Oswald and Degado qualified on the same day, at the same range. Unlike Oswald, Degado loved serving in the USMC, again, unlike Oswald, Degado was enthusiastically trying to get as high a score as possible. Oswald scored 191 Degado scored 192!!
John Iacoletti stated earlier: "Oswald had been out of the Marines much much longer than Whitman." Oswald committed his murders four years after leaving the Corps. Whitman committed his murders two years after being discharged. I guess the term "much much longer" is subjective.
Oswald himself was murdered, but he didn't murder anyone. I cleared that up for you. Your welcome in advance
-
Actually Whitman was less than 20 months. Yes, Oswald was much much longer, and even longer yet since he qualified as sharpshooter (barely).
-
Actually Whitman was less than 20 months. Yes, Oswald was much much longer, and even longer yet since he qualified as sharpshooter (barely).
No, it wasn't "much much longer". Oswald qualified as sharpshooter in Dec 1956 and discharged Sept 1959. Whitman qualified as sharpshooter between 1959-1960 with a score just three points higher than Oswald. Whitman was discharged Dec 1964 but during that time spent 30 days confinement and 90 hard labour. Do the math, to any reasonable person that's not "much much longer".
-
No, it wasn't "much much longer". Oswald qualified as sharpshooter in Dec 1956 and discharged Sept 1959. Whitman qualified as sharpshooter between 1959-1960 with a score just three points higher than Oswald. Whitman was discharged Dec 1964 but during that time spent 30 days confinement and 90 hard labour. Do the math, to any reasonable person that's not "much much longer".
Denis,
What makes you think John Iacoletti is a reasonable person?
(LOL)
-- MWT ;)
-
Disagree
So? Am I meant to be bothered?
-
Yes, I consider 4 years to be much much longer than 20 months. If you don’t, that’s your prerogative. I don’t care.
-
So? Am I meant to be bothered?
You are in charge of what you let bother you
-
Who could know for sure except Oswald? As a result, the question you asked necessitates speculation. Simply because we can't enter his mind to answer that question with certainty doesn't eliminate the evidence or create doubt of his guilt as you erroneously imply. But if you want speculation, Tippit is armed. If Oswald is not absolutely certain that he is dead or incapacitated, he still poses a potential danger. So Oswald finished him off. Better than getting shot in the back as he walks away.
"If Oswald is not absolutely certain that he is dead or incapacitated, he still poses a potential danger. So Oswald finished him off. Better than getting shot in the back as he walks away." Make sense. I am fairly sure that Oswald is pretty certain that he is dead ;)
-
Actually Whitman was less than 20 months. Yes, Oswald was much much longer, and even longer yet since he qualified as sharpshooter (barely).
Chas Whitman stabbed his mother and his wife to death...demonstrating that he was a homicidal maniac. It was probably caused by a tumor in his brain that drove him crazy. From his youth he loved guns. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman
That Oswald was homicidal... theory...speculation....conjecture....guesswork.....supposition ...etc
-
Chas Whitman stabbed his mother and his wife to death...demonstrating that he was a homicidal maniac. It was probably caused by a tumor in his brain that drove him crazy. From his youth he loved guns. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman
That Oswald was homicidal... theory...speculation....conjecture....guesswork.....supposition ...etc
Wrong again. First, it obviously is not necessary to demonstrate that an individual has a track record as a "homicidal maniac" to prove they assassinated the president. Was John Wilkes Booth a homicidal maniac? Putting that aside, it was Oswald rather than Whitman that had a track record of homicidal intent in his past. Oswald tried to kill Walker. Whitman had no such record of murderous violence in his background. If anything, Whitman was a much more stable individual than Oswald. He had never, for example, defected to the USSR. In Whitman's case, he had not attempted to kill anyone before he went on his final rampage. He killed his mother and wife as part of that event just prior to the shooting. Their deaths were related to whatever mental breakdown he had that precipitated the mass shooting. He was not a person, like Oswald, with a prior history of violence that would demonstrate that he was a homicidal maniac as you have dishonestly suggested here.
-
"If Oswald is not absolutely certain that he is dead or incapacitated, he still poses a potential danger. So Oswald finished him off. Better than getting shot in the back as he walks away." Make sense. I am fairly sure that Oswald is pretty certain that he is dead ;)
That sounds like speculation unless you have been using your Ouija board again. I thought you frowned upon that.
-
"If Oswald is not absolutely certain that he is dead or incapacitated, he still poses a potential danger. So Oswald finished him off. Better than getting shot in the back as he walks away." Make sense. I am fairly sure that Oswald is pretty certain that he is dead ;)
Oswald was a trained marine. If you're going to kill someone, make sure they're dead.
-
Putting that aside, it was Oswald rather than Whitman that had a track record of homicidal intent in his past. Oswald tried to kill Walker.
He says with no direct evidence whatsoever.
If anything, Whitman was a much more stable individual than Oswald. He had never, for example, defected to the USSR.
What’s so “unstable” about defecting?
-
Oswald was a trained marine. If you're going to kill someone, make sure they're dead.
A funny quote from Fear the Walking Dead goes 'If they're dead, shoot them'
-
Oswald was a trained marine. If you're going to kill someone, make sure they're dead.
Oswald --expert killer....Now we have put Oswald in the infantry? I thought he went to radar school.
Posted by: Richard Smith
Was John Wilkes Booth a homicidal maniac?
How would I know. I know you don't.
-
Oswald tried to kill Walker.
So by not killing someone...Oswald proved he was a homicidal maniac.
-
So by not killing someone...Oswald proved he was a homicidal maniac.
LOL. That is a bizarre and embarrassing interpretation of Oswald's attempt to murder someone with a rifle. You are really using the fact that he missed by chance when firing a rifle shot to kill someone as proof that he had no prior homicidal intent? That is Caprio-esque. It was you who suggested that unless an individual has some prior history of murderous violence, then they will not commit such a crime. That is not only an erroneous premise but you have actually reversed who had the more questionable background when comparing Whitman and Oswald. Oswald's prior history raised many more red flags than Charles Whitman. Oswald associated himself with a fringe political element, defected to the USSR, suggested to his pregnant wife that they hijack an airplane, was a person of interest to the FBI due to his bizarre behavior, tried to defect to Cuba, and had actually attempted to murder someone. The only reason Oswald had not actually "killed someone" prior to the assassination was a matter of chance rather than intent. His bullet deflected off a window frame. By comparison to nutty Oswald's life that included attempted murder, Whitman was a choir boy prior to going on his rampage.
-
Oswald associated himself with a fringe political element, defected to the USSR, suggested to his pregnant wife that they hijack an airplane, was a person of interest to the FBI due to his bizarre behavior, tried to defect to Cuba, and had actually attempted to murder someone.
“Richard” believes all of the WC conjectures as a matter of faith.
-
“Richard” believes all of the WC conjectures as a matter of faith.
Has a chronic case of Belin-itus or Posner's Syndrome ::)
-
Wrong again. First, it obviously is not necessary to demonstrate that an individual has a track record as a "homicidal maniac" to prove they assassinated the president. Was John Wilkes Booth a homicidal maniac? Putting that aside, it was Oswald rather than Whitman that had a track record of homicidal intent in his past. Oswald tried to kill Walker. Whitman had no such record of murderous violence in his background. If anything, Whitman was a much more stable individual than Oswald. He had never, for example, defected to the USSR. In Whitman's case, he had not attempted to kill anyone before he went on his final rampage. He killed his mother and wife as part of that event just prior to the shooting. Their deaths were related to whatever mental breakdown he had that precipitated the mass shooting. He was not a person, like Oswald, with a prior history of violence that would demonstrate that he was a homicidal maniac as you have dishonestly suggested here.
::)
Mr. EISENBERG: Mr. Frazier, I now hand you a bullet in a pill box which is marked Q-188.
I ask you whether you are familiar with this bullet.
I would like to state for the record that this bullet was found in the Walker residence
after the attempted assassination of General Walker.
Mr. McCLOY: As far as you know, we have no proof of that yet?
Mr. EISENBERG: That is right.
-
::)
Mr. EISENBERG: Mr. Frazier, I now hand you a bullet in a pill box which is marked Q-188.
I ask you whether you are familiar with this bullet.
I would like to state for the record that this bullet was found in the Walker residence
after the attempted assassination of General Walker.
Mr. McCLOY: As far as you know, we have no proof of that yet?
Mr. EISENBERG: That is right.
Key word 'yet' which eventually became 'cannot rule out' if memory serves
-
Oswald --expert killer....Now we have put Oswald in the infantry? I thought he went to radar school.
You didn't know Oswald was a trained USM, REALLY!?! ???
-
Has a chronic case of Belin-itus or Posner's Syndrome ::)
To recap: 1) Freeman presented a demonstrably false premise (i.e. an individual must have a prior history as a homicidal maniac to be an assassin); 2) then he even screws up his facts by using the example of Charles Whitman who had no prior history of violence prior to the day of his rampage in contrast to Oswald who had a laundry list of red flags. Well done! You were 100% wrong on everything. A perfect score. And then the CTer defense of last resort when all else fails. Oswald was framed for the attempt on Walker! After he is already dead and the authorities are satisfied of his guilt they then have to pile on for some inexplicable reason and coerce Marina to lie, fabricate the note and photos of Walker's home etc. If you want to play the Alice-in-Wonderland kook card that Oswald was framed and all the evidence is fake, then use that same standard to prove to us that Whitman murdered his wife and mother.
-
Key word 'yet' which eventually became 'cannot rule out' if memory serves
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/steeljacket.jpg)
STEEL JACKET :D
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/walkerbullet2.jpg)
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/walkerbullet1.jpg)
-
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/walker2.jpg)
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/walker1.jpg)
-
JW Booth killed a President at his workplace as well. It's convenient. Why kill POTUS somewhere else when POTUS comes to you?
-
Oswald was framed for the attempt on Walker!
Accurate statement. A dead guy is the easiest person to frame.
So far all these guys have is ...Oswald killed Kennedy because he was a homicidal maniac. How do they know he was a homicidal maniac?...Well, because after all-he killed Kennedy.
You didn't know Oswald was a trained USM, REALLY!?! ???
Recent events demonstrate you don't have to be trained to kill...to kill someone. However, Kennedy was indeed shot by professionally trained hitmen. Done clean and quickly.
-
Accurate statement. A dead guy is the easiest person to frame.
So far all these guys have is ...Oswald killed Kennedy because he was a homicidal maniac. How do they know he was a homicidal maniac?...Well, because after all-he killed Kennedy.
Yes, they're the masters of the circular argument. Here's another one.
Oswald must have shot Kennedy because he lied in his interrogations.
What did he lie about?
He said he didn't shoot Kennedy.
-
To recap: 1) Freeman presented a demonstrably false premise (i.e. an individual must have a prior history as a homicidal maniac to be an assassin);
Stop right there. Cite the actual reply number where I state exactly that an individual must have a prior history as a homicidal maniac to be an assassin); You can't because it doesn't exist. Post what you want but do not fabricate mine.
-
Accurate statement. A dead guy is the easiest person to frame.
So far all these guys have is ...Oswald killed Kennedy because he was a homicidal maniac. How do they know he was a homicidal maniac?...Well, because after all-he killed Kennedy.
Technically, they were saying that before Ruby shot Oswald.
-
Technically, they were saying that before Ruby shot Oswald.
Oswald wanted to be remembered for the next 10,000 years according to some. CTers want to 'rinse & repeat' for the next 10,000 years it seems to me. A happy ending made in heaven hell it would seem.
They'll remember him now...
-
Oswald wanted to be remembered for the next 10,000 years according to some. CTers want to 'rinse & repeat' for the next 10,000 years it seems to me. A happy ending made in heaven hell it would seem. They'll remember him now...
But Mr Chapman...if this were true, then why [after he supposedly shot the president] didn't Oswald lean out from his supposed sniper's window, shake his supposed rifle and yell at the street--Did everybody see that? Did I get him? If he's dead, I did it!! That is if he really wanted to 'be remembered' for sure.
-
Stop right there. Cite the actual reply number where I state exactly that an individual must have a prior history as a homicidal maniac to be an assassin); You can't because it doesn't exist. Post what you want but do not fabricate mine.
That’s why we call him Strawman “Smith”.
-
Oswald wanted to be remembered for the next 10,000 years according to some.
Sounds like you're adding a new conspiracy with this claim.
-
Sounds like you're adding a new conspiracy with this claim.
What claim? I said 'some are saying'
Apparently he said something to that effect in some sort of 'historical diary'
A fellow marine said something about that, I heard.
I personally don't think that he needed a conspiracy behind him
-
Yes, they're the masters of the circular argument. Here's another one.
Oswald must have shot Kennedy because he lied in his interrogations.
What did he lie about?
He said he didn't shoot Kennedy.
Iacoletti,
You just made that up.
Fabrication number 5,328.
-- MWT ;)
-
But Mr Chapman...if this were true, then why [after he supposedly shot the president] didn't Oswald lean out from his supposed sniper's window, shake his supposed rifle and yell at the street--Did everybody see that? Did I get him? If he's dead, I did it!! That is if he really wanted to 'be remembered' for sure.
He would be remembered in any case
But better to duck, wrangle a plea bargain (ie: avoid frying), live to see his kids grow up, and get a yearly Nov 22 reminder on every media outlet on the planet.
-
He said he didn't shoot Kennedy
Okay, he can go
-
He said he didn't shoot Kennedy.
And Scott Peterson said he didn't murder Laci Peterson and their unborn child.
Too bad Mark Lane couldn't have defended him.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Peterson
-- MWT ;)
-
Spin away, but it won't work. It is infinitely more difficult for a single person to kill with a rifle than up close with a pistol. That is why NO LNer ever attempted their task with a rifle.
The use of a rifle confirms that it was a carefully orchestrated conspiracy utilizing multiple shooters.
I have only read the thread up to the quoted post above, but with reference to the bolded... ... :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
-
Okay, he can go
Only a guilty person would deny his guilt.
-
Stop right there. Cite the actual reply number where I state exactly that an individual must have a prior history as a homicidal maniac to be an assassin); You can't because it doesn't exist. Post what you want but do not fabricate mine.
LOL. Run Freeman run. You noted (erroneously) that Charles Whitman had a prior history as a "homicidal maniac" prior to his rampage and compared him to Oswald who you claimed had no such history (again erroneous). Explain to us what you meant by making that comparison. It is pretty clear you are suggesting that because Oswald had no prior such history of murder that lent itself to his innocence. And that Whitman's prior violent history lent itself to his guilt. But explain what point you were trying to make if this interpretation is a "fabrication."
-
LOL. Run Freeman run. You noted (erroneously) that Charles Whitman had a prior history as a "homicidal maniac" prior to his rampage
Wrong again, Strawman "Smith". What Freeman actually said was, "Chas Whitman stabbed his mother and his wife to death...demonstrating that he was a homicidal maniac".
and compared him to Oswald who you claimed had no such history (again erroneous).
No, what he actually said was, "That Oswald was homicidal... theory...speculation....conjecture....guesswork.....supposition ...etc".
Which is true. The fact that you think he tried to kill Walker isn't a history of being homicidal.
-
Doesn?t this strike anyone as quite odd? I mean generally if you want to try and get away with a crime I would imagine it would help to do it where NO ONE KNOWS WHO YOU ARE! In 1963 they did NOT have the type of equipment they have now to quickly ID you and track you via GPS and other methods, so if you are unknown this greatly increases your chances of getting away with it! As for the claim of ?Well he wanted to be famous? we have to go by his behavior after he was arrested! Did it strike anyone as wanting to be famous?
Also, the excuse DVP gave me years ago for not committing the crime at Love Field was that he couldn?t get his rifle there without being seen! First of all, he didn?t need ?his? rifle (something I don?t think ever existed by the way) as he could have used a pistol instead and that could have easily been hidden from a cab driver (much better than a bus scenario as again it creates less people who can remember you).
Secondly, don?t you think the SAME logic applies to getting a ride from Wes Frazier and then lugging the rifle two to three blocks to the TSBD and then lugging it around until you hide it in the TSBD for later use? These were people who KNEW you too by sight and in some cases by NAME!
Also, it would seem DP was a much tougher place to get away from. At the airport he could have dropped the gun and disappeared into the crowd and then even got on a flight out of town. This sounds much more plausible than the OFFICIAL scenario to me.
When one adds in the fact LHO was NOT very good with a rifle this would seem to make this the ONLY scenario to me.
What are your thoughts on this?
Why Would LHO Choose His Workplace As The Location For Shooting JFK? Doesn?t this strike anyone as quite odd?
First off.... Are you sure that Lee made the decision to use the TSBD as the location for the scene??? I believe that he was placed in the TSBD by the plotters ( Hoover's "extra special" Special Agents....primarily Warren De Brueys. He was led to believe that he was a player in a staged hoax attempt to shoot JFK. ( Just as he had played a role in the hoax atempt to shoot General Walker)
Naturally Lee would not have balked at being connected to THE TSBD if he thought the FBI was setting the stage to make it look like he had tried to shoot JFK but missed and was seeking asylum in Cuba.
-
LOL. Run Freeman run. But explain what point you were trying to make if this interpretation is a "fabrication."
Run Smith run. You were caught making stuff up AGAIN. Learn to let it go can't you :'(
-
Only a guilty person would deny his guilt.
I disagree. Prisons are full of "innocent" people.
Just ask them.
------------
Edit: added quotations to innocent. 3:01 EST
-
Prisons are full of innocent people
I know they are. Just ask the Innocence Project.
-
I know they are. Just ask the Innocence Project.
Innocent as in "everybody's 'innocent' in here, don't you know that?"
-
Innocent as in "everybody's 'innocent' in here, don't you know that?"
Especially if Chapman is 100% sure they are probably guilty.
-
What claim? I said 'some are saying'
Apparently he said something to that effect in some sort of 'historical diary'
A fellow marine said something about that, I heard.
I personally don't think that he needed a conspiracy behind him
You can think whatever you like but we know he did not shoot JFK or Connelly from the sixth story window of the TSBD and no one else shot Kennedy or Connelly from the sixth story window of the TSBD. That is just a fact
-
You can think whatever you like but we know [Oswald] did not shoot JFK or Connelly from the sixth story window of the TSBD and no one else shot Kennedy or Connelly from the sixth story window of the TSBD. That is just a fact
Dear Peter,
How do you know that?
Hmm?
-- MWT ;)
-
You can think whatever you like but we know he did not shoot JFK or Connelly from the sixth story window of the TSBD and no one else shot Kennedy or Connelly from the sixth story window of the TSBD. That is just a fact
This is just getting farcical now, if it wasn't already. So, there were planted bullet casings. Instructed testimony about 'hearing the shots from above and the casings hitting the floor' et al?
-
This is just getting farcical now, if it wasn't already. So, there were planted bullet casings. Instructed testimony about 'hearing the shots from above and the casings hitting the floor' et al?
Exactly.
I'm afraid Peter lives in a fantasy world ...
-- MWT ;)
-
You can think whatever you like but we know he did not shoot JFK or Connelly from the sixth story window of the TSBD and no one else shot Kennedy or Connelly from the sixth story window of the TSBD. That is just a fact
If its fact then there is proof.
So, proof please?
This would be global earth shattering news by the way.
You will be rich and famous beyond your wildest dreams if you've cracked it.
-
Exactly.
I'm afraid Peter lives in a fantasy world ...
-- MWT ;)
Peter is a rational and logical person..... He's correct... Lee Oswald never shot anybody on 11/22/63.... That's just a fact.
-
Instructed testimony about 'hearing the shots from above and the casings hitting the floor' et al?
What is "instructed testimony"?
-
The entire FBI report on Oswald's criminal history.... http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/39/3999-001.gif
By all rights..he should have been charged with filing a false request for a hardship discharge from the Marine Corps. He also should have been brought up on accusations of defection if not treason.
Why not?
-
Especially if Chapman is 100% sure they are probably guilty.
Nah, just 90-98% according to TIP
(TIP estimates from 2-10% of inmates are innocent)
-
Nah, just 90-98% according to TIP
(TIP estimates from 2-10% of inmates are innocent)
What?!
But the cops said they did it. There were lineups! The FBI even matched fingerprints. Say it ain’t so!
-
The entire FBI report on Oswald's criminal history.... http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/39/3999-001.gif
By all rights..he should have been charged with filing a false request for a hardship discharge from the Marine Corps. He also should have been brought up on accusations of defection if not treason.
Why not?
he should have been charged with filing a false request for a hardship discharge from the Marine Corps.
He received the early discharge because the agency wanted to have him in place for the U-2 flights over Russia.....The Marine Corp cooperated and released him on a hardship discharge....
He also should have been brought up on accusations of defection if not treason.
Can you explain why the US Government would send him a new draft card in Minsk, in Feburary of 1960 .....The card was signed by "Gut Schieffer" Which translates to "Good Mariner".... Clearly someone was congratulating Lee Oswald on his success at penetrating the "Iron Curtain". ( I hasten to point out that a draft card for Lee Oswald would have been ludicrous...Because he was in Minsk and beyond the clutches of the Selective Service)....
-
Can you explain why the US Government would send him a new draft card in Minsk, in Feburary of 1960 .....The card was signed by "Gut Schieffer" Which translates to "Good Mariner"....
Remember that time on the old forum when a native German speaker told you that this is a load of bunk? Good times.
Also why would an American undercover in the Soviet Union be given a secret message in German?
-
Remember that time on the old forum when a native German speaker told you that this is a load of bunk? Good times.
Also why would an American undercover in the Soviet Union be given a secret message in German?
I'm sorry if you lack the astuteness to understand that spy organizations use deceit and deception and all sorts of clever subterfuges in communicating with their secret agents...
PS.... Do you believe that Bettina Krotch is the poster's real name?
-
This is just getting farcical now, if it wasn't already. So, there were planted bullet casings. Instructed testimony about 'hearing the shots from above and the casings hitting the floor' et al?
Hearing? What does shots from above and casing hitting the floor sound like? Did they hear someone walking above? Did it sound like LHO footsteps? What about any other competing noises? Are you saying that hearing casings hitting the floor has to be the next floor what about the 7th floor? You don't know and neither did the so-called witnesses
-
Hearing? What does shots from above and casing hitting the floor sound like? Did they hear someone walking above? Did it sound like LHO footsteps? What about any other competing noises? Are you saying that hearing casings hitting the floor has to be the next floor what about the 7th floor? You don't know and neither did the so-called witnesses
Norman said NOTHING about hearing anything hit the floor above his head in the immediate aftermath ......The three amigos stayed at the windows looking out for several seconds ( Dillard said he took their picture about thirty seconds after the shots, if you can believe THAT)...And then they were interested in the railroad yard....NOT in anything over their heads.
-
Remember that time on the old forum when a native German speaker told you that this is a load of bunk? Good times.
Also why would an American undercover in the Soviet Union be given a secret message in German?
Psssst....John....Anybody can claim to be a native from any country and claim they know what two words mean.... ( in fact a secret agent would employ such a statement to discredit something they did not want revealed)
The signature of "Gut Schieffer" doesn't even make sense.... ( Have you ever heard of someone with the name "Gut")
That "signature" was simply a way of congratulating Lee Oswald ..... They knew that Lee knew a little German and deduced that he would recognize the message, but the Russians wouldn't have guessed that the "draft card" was only a clever way of communicating a message to Lee....
-
Norman said NOTHING about hearing anything hit the floor above his head in the immediate aftermath ......The three amigos stayed at the windows looking out for several seconds ( Dillard said he took their picture about thirty seconds after the shots, if you can believe THAT)...And then they were interested in the railroad yard....NOT in anything over their heads.
Dillard is a liar too, firecrackers were what they should of heard, like so many others did. They didn't hear someone hurrying across the sixth floor they didn't hear anyone running down the stairs. Try and follow DVP's explanation, I am starting to think he was actually a witness or he thinks he was.
-
Dillard is a liar too, firecrackers were what they should of heard, like so many others did. They didn't hear someone hurrying across the sixth floor they didn't hear anyone running down the stairs. Try and follow DVP's explanation, I am starting to think he was actually a witness or he thinks he was.
Let's give Von P a little slack.... The poor man has been duped and mislead and doesn't have the courage to face the facts.....
-
What’s your evidence that Lee knew a little a German?
I don’t even think it looks like “Gut Schieffer” to be honest.
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/gut-schieffer.jpg)
-
What’s your evidence that Lee knew a little a German?
I don’t even think it looks like “Gut Schieffer” to be honest.
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/gut-schieffer.jpg)
Oh Hell...I can't remember where Lee himself claimed that he understood and spoke a little German....( perhaps it was on his application to Albert Schwietzer college)
-
What’s your evidence that Lee knew a little a German?
I don’t even think it looks like “Gut Schieffer” to be honest.
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/gut-schieffer.jpg)
Thanks for your valued opinion.... You rarely offer an opinion in support of a rebuttal.
So perhaps you'll offer an opinion about why in the world would the US government be sending Lee a "draft card" when he is supposedly a traitor who had defected to Russia?? .... And I believe the message of " good Marine" was concealed in the signature..
The news papers had reported that Lee Oswald was an turncoat ( and therefore an undesirable candidate for the military ) and yet they send him a "draft card that had him classified as IV-A ( 4-A) which is a classification for a highly desirable individual.
-
Let's give Von P a little slack.... The poor man has been duped and mislead and doesn't have the courage to face the facts.....
I don't think he was duped. I think he knows he's wrong, how couldn't someone that has as much information as he does.
There are bad people and then there are evil people like DVP. The average person that believes the LN theory is a person that lets the government and the media think for them, but if a person is a hardcore LN defender they are usually above average intelligence, but sadly they would be the first to take from the collection plate at their church. After all it is the only reason they go
-
I don't think he was duped. I think he knows he's wrong, how couldn't someone that has as much information as he does.
There are bad people and then there are evil people like DVP. The average person that believes the LN theory is a person that lets the government and the media think for them, but if a person is a hardcore LN defender they are usually above average intelligence, but sadly they would be the first to take from the collection plate at their church. After all it is the only reason they go
I donno Peter....I don't believe that the cretins that plotted and murdered President Kennedy were evil.... They thought of themselves as true patriots and they thought that JFK was playing into the hands of the communists and destroying the United States. The Bay of Pigs Fiasco really stuck in their craw and then the missile crisis hardened their animosity. Plus.... LBJ was on the verge of going to prison, so he was very happy to back the plot....A Hobson's choice for LBJ...The big House or the White House.....
-
Because Ruth Paine helped him secure a job there and of course the parade route would be changed so LHO could "Patsy" on up and the conspirators could put the crosshairs on JFK and do the Triangularization of shots on JFK while LHO was in the break area . Oswald said he was a Patsy but apparently Ruby knew better, or did he ?
The only response that was on topic.
Did Mrs Randle [Frazier's sister] tell Ruth about the opening?** Oswald did not obtain that job on his own. That left the Report believers divining that everything that happened regarding the assassination was SPONTANEOUS like creation itself!
Oswald did not fill out his own application.
(https://i0.wp.com/jfkfacts.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/LHO-TSBD-job-App-101563.docx1.jpg?resize=791%2C1024&ssl=1)
**Let's see----From the DVP site....
RUTH PAINE'S W.C. TESTIMONY:
MRS. PAINE -- "As best I can reconstruct it, this was while having coffee at my immediate neighbors, Mrs. Ed Roberts, and also present was Mrs. Bill Randle, and Lee had said over the weekend that he had gotten the last of the unemployment compensation checks that were due him, and that it had been smaller than the others had been, and disappointing in its smallness and he looked very discouraged when he went to look for work. ....
"And the subject of his looking for work and that he hadn't found work for a week came up while we were having coffee, the four young mothers at Mrs. Roberts' house, and Mrs. Randle mentioned that her younger brother, Wesley Frazier, thought they needed another person at the Texas School Book Depository where Wesley worked. Marina then asked me, after we had gone home, asked me if I would call...the School Book Depository to see if indeed there was the possibility of an opening, and at her request, I did telephone. ....
"I looked up the number in the book, and dialed it, was told I would need to speak to Mr. Truly, who was at the warehouse. The phone was taken to Mr. Truly, and I talked with him and said...I know of a young man whose wife was staying in my house, the wife was expecting a child, they already had a little girl and he had been out of work for a while and was very interested in getting any employment and his name, and was there a possibility of an opening there, and Mr. Truly said he didn't know whether he had an opening, that the young man should apply himself in person."
_________________________
VIA LINNIE MAE RANDLE'S W.C. TESTIMONY:
JOSEPH BALL -- "Was there anything said then about the Texas School Book Depository as a place he might get a job?"
LINNIE MAE RANDLE -- "Well, we didn't say that he might get a job, because I didn't know there was a job open. The reason that we were being helpful, Wesley had just looked for a job, and I had helped him to try to find one. We listed several places that he might go to look for work. When you live in a place you know some places that someone with, you know, not very much of an education can find work. So, it was among one of the places that we mentioned. We mentioned several others, and Mrs. Paine said that well, he couldn't apply for any of the jobs that would require driving because he couldn't drive, and it was just in conversation that you might talk just any day and not think a thing on earth about it. In fact, I didn't even know that he had even tried any place that we mentioned."
MR. BALL -- "What were some of the other places mentioned?"
MRS. RANDLE -- "Well, I remember two of them. Mrs. Roberts entered into the conversation and, of course, she is more familiar with the place than I am. It was Manor Bakeries which was a home delivery service. Then there was this Texas Gypsum which makes sheet rock and things like that, and we mentioned because Wesley had tried those places that I mentioned those."
MR. BALL -- "And then you also mentioned the Texas Book Depository?"
MRS. RANDLE -- "Well, I didn't know there was a job opening over there."
MR. BALL -- "But did you mention it?"
MRS. RANDLE -- "But we said he might try over there. There might be work over there because it was the busy season but I didn't have any previous knowledge that there was any job opening."
MR. BALL -- "Did you later learn that Lee had applied for a job?"
MRS. RANDLE -- "She told me, Mrs. Paine told me, later that he had applied for the job, and had gotten the job and she thanked us for naming the places and things like that."
Looks to me like there was an effort to cover Mrs Paine's obvious influence.
-
I donno Peter....I don't believe that the cretins that plotted and murdered President Kennedy were evil.... They thought of themselves as true patriots and they thought that JFK was playing into the hands of the communists and destroying the United States. The Bay of Pigs Fiasco really stuck in their craw and then the missile crisis hardened their animosity. Plus.... LBJ was on the verge of going to prison, so he was very happy to back the plot....A Hobson's choice for LBJ...The big House or the White House.....
Incidentally....I'm amazed that nobody brought up JFK's illegal and traitorous "QUID PRO QUO " of removing the missiles from Turkey in exchange for Nikita Khrueschev's removal of the missiles from Cuba. JFK was secretly negotiating a deal without the knowledge or the consent of congress, or the JCS.... Basically JFK was committing treason. Which was far more serious than the charges against President Trump.
-
Incidentally....I'm amazed that nobody brought up JFK's illegal and traitorous "QUID PRO QUO " of removing the missiles from Turkey in exchange for Nikita Khrueschev's removal of the missiles from Cuba. JFK was secretly negotiating a deal without the knowledge or the consent of congress, or the JCS.... Basically JFK was committing treason. Which was far more serious than the charges against President Trump.
I believe that aside from treaties, the President can enter into certain agreements with foreign powers. This is in the Constitution.
-
Please stay on topic....
Why Would LHO Choose His Workplace As The Location For Shooting JFK? is the topic :)
-
Please stay on topic....
Why Would LHO Choose His Workplace As The Location For Shooting JFK? is the topic :)
What has Mrs. Randle and Mrs. Paine got to do with Oswald's choosing his workplace to shoot Kennedy?
-
What has Mrs. Randle and Mrs. Paine got to do with Oswald's choosing his workplace to shoot Kennedy?
He didn't shoot Kennedy so the question is moot.
-
Rob...Oswald was "placed" in that job (by his "handlers")...as part of employing him as the designated patsy in the case. Nothing terribly complicated, actually.
-
Rob...Oswald was "placed" in that job (by his "handlers")...as part of employing him as the designated patsy in the case. Nothing terribly complicated, actually.
Wow. Not complicated at all. How come nobody thought of that before? ::)
-
Rob...Oswald was "placed" in that job (by his "handlers")...as part of employing him as the designated patsy in the case. Nothing terribly complicated, actually.
You are so right, Mr Halle......There's nothing at all complicated about this case. Lee was the sucker who thought he was working as an undercover agent for the FBI ( like his boyhood hero, Herb Philbrick) What causes the complication for some folks, is that they have painted the FBI as an organization wrapped in the American Flag...and those folks simply cannot abandon worshiping that false idol.
Oswald was "placed" in that job (by his "handlers")...as part of employing him as the designated patsy in the case.
One of the key people in getting Lee Oswald in position at the TSBD was Ruth Paine..... And she admitted that she was an FBI informant when she appeared before the kangaroo court which is politely referred to as "the Warren Commission".
-
Without sifting through 44 pages to see if someone has stated the obvious: Oswald did not "choose" his workplace as the location for shooting at President Kennedy.
Oswald read about the President's motorcade passing Elm Street Dealey Plaza. He read it in the Dallas Newspaper either on Tuesday 19 November or Wednesday 20 November 1963. So did thousands of others.
He recognized the possibility of assassinating President--on Friday 2 November 1963.
There were several factors that convinced him that it could be achieved:
-- His place of work was on the parade route.
-- His co-workers were likely to be outside the building watching the parade.
-- The 6th floor was likely to be abandoned during the lunch-hour.
-- The 6th floor provided a good vantage point to fire at a person in a moving vehicle (convertible) driving at a slow speed.
-- He deduced a way to transport his rifle from the Paine's garage in Irving to the TSBD.
-- He thought of an excuse for bringing the rifle into the TSBD. Should his possessions be searched by law enforcement: He could claim he was taking the rifle to a Gunsmith to have it repaired or altered.
-- He thought it might be possible to kill President Kennedy with one shot. This would make it less likely that the location of the assassin would be pinpointed.
-- He thought it would be possible to flee the scene of the crime rapidly. Go down the 1st floor in the freight elevator and depart the TSBD from the door near the loading dock.
-- He may have considered the possibility of removing the murder-weapon from the scene of the crime. Making the package that concealed the rifle too short was a mistake. Disassembling the rifle to hide it in the package precluded placing the gun back in it and taking it from the crime-scene and disposing of it in the Trinity River.
In a way: Fate chose Oswald's workplace as the location from which he could assassinate President John F. Kennedy.
Do you realize Rob: The title of your Subject suggests a personal belief that Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin of President Kennedy.
-
Yep, Walt. One of the things I stress in my book "Treason and Treachery in 1963 is that the WC was essentially a post mortem trial of suspect (and designated patsy) Mr. Oswald. And, this body was nothing less than a "Star Chamber" (or, yes, "Kangaroo Court") tribunal...mandated to convict the suspect (and push an "Official Narrative," which was meant to protect the perpetrators and assuage the fears of the American public).
-
Lidel's version of this is TOTAL bunk. Among other things....LHO had no motive, did not own "his rifle," was NOT on the sixth floor at the time of the shootiing...and the WR was noting less than a post mortem "Star Chamber" tribunal charged with turning in a "guilty decision." A TOTAL whitewash.
-
Lidel's version of this is TOTAL bunk. Among other things....LHO had no motive, did not own "his rifle," was NOT on the sixth floor at the time of the shootiing...and the WR was noting less than a post mortem "Star Chamber" tribunal charged with turning in a "guilty decision." A TOTAL whitewash.
Oh boy. Need hip waders to get through that. BS:
-
Lidel's version of this is TOTAL bunk. Among other things....LHO had no motive, did not own "his rifle," was NOT on the sixth floor at the time of the shootiing...and the WR was noting less than a post mortem "Star Chamber" tribunal charged with turning in a "guilty decision." A TOTAL whitewash.
Assertions "all". No rebuttal of the likely mindset of the assassin.
Rob Caprio's Subject title finishes with a Question mark. Therefore it invites speculation.
-
Without sifting through 44 pages to see if someone has stated the obvious: Oswald did not "choose" his workplace as the location for shooting at President Kennedy.
Oswald read about the President's motorcade passing Elm Street Dealey Plaza. He read it in the Dallas Newspaper either on Tuesday 19 November or Wednesday 20 November 1963. So did thousands of others.
He recognized the possibility of assassinating President--on Friday 2 November 1963.
There were several factors that convinced him that it could be achieved:
-- His place of work was on the parade route.
-- His co-workers were likely to be outside the building watching the parade.
-- The 6th floor was likely to be abandoned during the lunch-hour.
-- The 6th floor provided a good vantage point to fire at a person in a moving vehicle (convertible) driving at a slow speed.
-- He deduced a way to transport his rifle from the Paine's garage in Irving to the TSBD.
-- He thought of an excuse for bringing the rifle into the TSBD. Should his possessions be searched by law enforcement: He could claim he was taking the rifle to a Gunsmith to have it repaired or altered.
-- He thought it might be possible to kill President Kennedy with one shot. This would make it less likely that the location of the assassin would be pinpointed.
-- He thought it would be possible to flee the scene of the crime rapidly. Go down the 1st floor in the freight elevator and depart the TSBD from the door near the loading dock.
-- He may have considered the possibility of removing the murder-weapon from the scene of the crime. Making the package that concealed the rifle too short was a mistake. Disassembling the rifle to hide it in the package precluded placing the gun back in it and taking it from the crime-scene and disposing of it in the Trinity River.
In a way: Fate chose Oswald's workplace as the location from which he could assassinate President John F. Kennedy.
Do you realize Rob: The title of your Subject suggests a personal belief that Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin of President Kennedy.
Thank you for showing how he was perfectly set-up, or so they thought. The fact is JFK & Connelly were not shot by LHO but someone fooled you. Show me just a simple photo of LHO or anyone else in that window. That should be easy, it doesn't have to be at the moment you think it happens because it would take time for a person to get ready and time to pull away . That is a lot of time. I welcome any photo that shows even the presence of someone in that window. Maybe he was in one of those boxes. No one sees Oswald leave the building, Tough case Good luck All the eyes, all the cameras but the guy was invisible. Incredible how 50 agents say "I don't know what we're looking for but I have a hunch it is at a theater"
-
Thank you for showing how he was perfectly set-up, or so they thought. The fact is JFK & Connelly were not shot by LHO but someone fooled you. Show me just a simple photo of LHO or anyone else in that window. That should be easy, it doesn't have to be at the moment you think it happens because it would take time for a person to get ready and time to pull away . That is a lot of time. I welcome any photo that shows even the presence of someone in that window. Maybe he was in one of those boxes. No one sees Oswald leave the building, Tough case Good luck All the eyes, all the cameras but the guy was invisible. Incredible how 50 agents say "I don't know what we're looking for but I have a hunch it is at a theater"
A nonsensical comment (reply).
The "factors" do not point to Lee Harvey Oswald being set up. They describe how he would be inclined to attempt to assassinate President Kennedy from his workplace.
There no rule-book for assassins that says they must be photographed during the crime or when attempting to escape.
What "50 agents at a theater"? Johnny Calvin Brewer asked Julia Postal to call the Police. The Dallas cops were on high-alert due to the murder of Officer JD Tippit in the area. The Police thought there was "a chance" that the murderer was hiding in the Texas Theater: It turned out that he was.
Your last sentence is inane. You could insert an "s" in that word and it would still be accurate.
-
What "50 agents at a theater"? Johnny Calvin Brewer asked Julia Postal to call the Police. The Dallas cops were on high-alert due to the murder of Officer JD Tippit in the area. The Police thought there was "a chance" that the murderer was hiding in the Texas Theater: It turned out that he was.
Easy to say. Harder to prove.
-
Lee Harvey Occam-Oswald (in charge of being remembered for the next 10,000 years) along with his besties A. Hidell (in charge of weapon procurement), O.H. Lee (in charge of safe-house procurement), and Dirty Harvey (in charge of killing poor dumb cops), had a eureka moment the week of the assassination, went and got a rifle, poked it out a window and got lucky.
-
Lee Harvey Occam-Oswald (in charge of being remembered for the next 10,000 years) along with his besties A. Hidell (in charge of weapon procurement), O.H. Lee (in charge of safe-house procurement), and Dirty Harvey (in charge of killing poor dumb cops), had a eureka moment the week of the assassination, went and got a rifle, poked it out a window and got lucky.
Thank you for displaying your child like reasoning ....... I now understand why your favorite story is Alice In Wonderland.
-
Easy to say. Harder to prove.
No need to prove anything: Brewer's and Postal's actions on 22 November 1963 (Texas Theater) are historical facts!
-
Thank you for displaying your child like reasoning ....... I now understand why your favorite story is Alice In Wonderland.
If you only had a brain
It's mockery, fool
-
No need to prove anything: Brewer's and Postal's actions on 22 November 1963 (Texas Theater) are historical facts!
I’m talking about your claim that “it turned out” that the murderer was hiding in the Texas Theater.
-
Thank you for displaying your child like reasoning ....... I now understand why your favorite story is Alice In Wonderland.
Chapman thinks that silly irrelevant quips add to the conversation.
-
A nonsensical comment (reply).
The "factors" do not point to Lee Harvey Oswald being set up. They describe how he would be inclined to attempt to assassinate President Kennedy from his workplace.
There no rule-book for assassins that says they must be photographed during the crime or when attempting to escape.
What "50 agents at a theater"? Johnny Calvin Brewer asked Julia Postal to call the Police. The Dallas cops were on high-alert due to the murder of Officer JD Tippit in the area. The Police thought there was "a chance" that the murderer was hiding in the Texas Theater: It turned out that he was.
Your last sentence is inane. You could insert an "s" in that word and it would still be accurate.
Prof English, what did you do wrong here?
There no rule-book for assassins that says they must be photographed during the crime or when attempting to escape.
There was one?
It turned out that he was
So they did see him in the window?
Or you have photographic evidence showing an individual in that window?
Answer: No you don't.
Question: Why don't you?
Answer: Because it never happened
Too bad your bag of evidence does not support your conclusion. You are not the first sucker.
-
So they did see him in the window? Or you have photographic evidence showing an individual in that window?
Klienschmidt,
Are you sure photographic evidence would be sufficient?
I thought you, like Iacoletti, required notarized statements from fifteen witnesses, and DNA samples, too.
-- MWT ;)
PS Oh, you mean the Sniper's Nest Window!
Hmm
Got a ticket I mean DNA samples?
If not, you ain't got popcorn I mean a case.
-
He didn't shoot Kennedy so the question is moot.
Freeman,
How do you know that?
"Crummy rifle, he sometimes got 'Maggie's Drawers' at 500 yards, and, gosh darn it, he said he was just a patsy, didn't he??"
LOL
Or is that just wishful thinking on your part, because, well ... you hate the evil, evil, evil CIA so doggone much!!!?
-- MWT ;)
-
Prof English, what did you do wrong here?
There was one?
One what?
So they did see him in the window?
Or you have photographic evidence showing an individual in that window?
Answer: No you don't.
Question: Why don't you?
Answer: Because it never happened
Too bad your bag of evidence does not support your conclusion. You are not the first sucker.
Prof English, what did you do wrong here?
Enough with the cryptography?
There was one?
One what?
So they did see him in the window?
Are you implying that Oswald must have been positively identified for him to have committed the assassination?
Or you have photographic evidence showing an individual in that window?
Not necessary for Oswald to be the assassin shooting from his workplace.
Answer: No you don't.
I don't need to.
Question: Why don't you?
See directly above.
Answer: Because it never happened
What never happened?
Too bad your bag of evidence does not support your conclusion. You are not the first sucker.
What evidence? Your last sentence is an assertion.
-
Prof English, what did you do wrong here?
Enough with the cryptography?
There was one?
One what?
So they did see him in the window?
Are you implying that Oswald must have been positively identified for him to have committed the assassination?
Or you have photographic evidence showing an individual in that window?
Not necessary for Oswald to be the assassin shooting from his workplace.
Answer: No you don't.
I don't need to.
Question: Why don't you?
See directly above.
Answer: Because it never happened
What never happened?
Too bad your bag of evidence does not support your conclusion. You are not the first sucker.
What evidence? Your last sentence is an assertion.
You said: "There no rule-book..." which of course, you still missed your error.
I said: There was one?
So you see LHO shooting from that window? You either or you don't
-
You said: "There no rule-book..." which of course, you still missed your error.
I said: There was one?
So you see LHO shooting from that window? You either or you don't
There: no rule-book... [I missed a colon]
There's no rule-book... [I missed an apostrophe and an "s"]
There is no rule-book... [I missed the word "is"]
For Oswald not to be positively identified at the window from where shots were fired does not exonerate him of assassinating President John F. Kennedy.
-
Freeman, How do you know that? "Crummy rifle, he sometimes got 'Maggie's Drawers' at 500 yards, and, gosh darn it, he said he was just a patsy, didn't he??"
Or is that just wishful thinking on your part, because, well ... you hate the evil, evil, evil CIA so doggone much!!!?
I revived this thread [reply #427] because I just knew that Tommy the Troll was going to ask that.
I can tell that he [and some other posters here] must not have even read that post.
-
I revived this thread [reply #427] because I just knew that Tommy the Troll was going to ask that.
I can tell that he [and some other posters here] must not have even read that post.
Freeman,
What post?
LOL
-- MWT :)
-
There: no rule-book... [I missed a colon]
There's no rule-book... [I missed an apostrophe and an "s"]
There is no rule-book... [I missed the word "is"]
For Oswald not to be positively identified at the window from where shots were fired does not exonerate him of assassinating President John F. Kennedy.
I find it curious that the general or major conspiracy argument is that these major groups - or elements of them - like "the CIA" and "the FBI" and "the Pentagon" and "the DPD" conspired to kill JFK and frame Oswald and yet they didn't plant four or five witnesses in Dealey Plaza to say they saw Oswald in that window. Remember that the conspiracy explanation in the Tippit shooting is that the witnesses were all coerced or planted or lied into saying it was Oswald who shot him. So why didn't Hoover or whomever plant witnesses to say they saw Oswald pull the trigger?
We can't prove - and certainly not to these conspiracy absolutists - that there wasn't a conspiracy and LHO didn't shoot JFK. So all we can do is ask these types of questions. For me, the failure of these alleged conspirators to do something simple such as plant witnesses who would identify Oswald as the shooter is evidence that there was no conspiracy. No, not proof. And no, not substantive evidence. But some evidence.
The conspiracists don't like these types of questions. Such as why didn't Marina say Oswald hated JFK? Or why didn't Paine said she saw the rifle. Et cetera. But sorry, they are legitimate ones even if they can't answer them.
-
Prof English, what did you do wrong here?
There was one?
So they did see him in the window?
Or you have photographic evidence showing an individual in that window?
Answer: No you don't.
Question: Why don't you?
Answer: Because it never happened
Too bad your bag of evidence does not support your conclusion. You are not the first sucker.
So they did see him in the window?
Or you have photographic evidence showing an individual in that window?
Answer: No you don't.
Question: Why don't you?
Answer: Because it never happened
Too bad your bag of evidence does not support your conclusion. You are not the first sucker.
-
Freeman, What post?
Reply #427. Instead of reading stuff you are just here for grins right?
-
I find it curious that the general or major conspiracy argument is that these major groups - or elements of them - like "the CIA" and "the FBI" and "the Pentagon" and "the DPD" conspired to kill JFK and frame Oswald and yet they didn't plant four or five witnesses in Dealey Plaza to say they saw Oswald in that window. Remember that the conspiracy explanation in the Tippit shooting is that the witnesses were all coerced or planted or lied into saying it was Oswald who shot him. So why didn't Hoover or whomever plant witnesses to say they saw Oswald pull the trigger? The conspiracists don't like these types of questions. Such as why didn't Marina say Oswald hated JFK? Or why didn't Paine said she saw the rifle. Et cetera. But sorry, they are legitimate ones even if they can't answer them.
This has all been asked before. Everything has.
"I saw him do it'' witnesses were rounded up were they not? [even if they didn't see anything]..but phony ones were not required or even desirable.
Were they there to watch the parade or gaze at the windows? There was already enough 'evidence'.
"Paine saw the rifle"? She didn't because there was no rifle in her garage. If she said there was anyway..it would have raised too many more questions.
Marina had already told the cops that Oswald bore no animosity toward JFK...so she couldn't very well tell the Commission any differently.
-
It’s a question of when Oswald would have read the newspaper
If it is not until Thursday, then the reason is it’s risky to take a rifle in a package into Dealey plaza on Friday morning,let alone into some other building
On the other hand, if Oswald read the Tuesday paper then he had more than enough time to explore Dealey plaza, select some spot or building, and to carry a package with rifle. If William Castor could walk around carrying TWO rifles as well as EXHIBIT them without any DPD , FBI, or other security being alarmed, then surely Oswald could have probably done so with just ONE package
-
Klienschmidt,
Are you sure photographic evidence would be sufficient?
I thought you, like Iacoletti, required notarized statements from fifteen witnesses, and DNA samples, too.
“Tommy said so” should be good enough evidence for anything. At least according to Tommy.
-
For Oswald not to be positively identified at the window from where shots were fired does not exonerate him of assassinating President John F. Kennedy.
Guilty by default until proven innocent?
-
“Tommy said so” should be good enough evidence for anything. At least according to Tommy.
Iacoletti,
Do you still think the three people on the Pergola Patio in Towner might be men, wearing Bermuda shorts to a presidential motorcade on a cool, blustery late November day in conservative 1963 Dallas, Texas?
And that one of the dudes is wearing ... gasp ... a light blue headscarf?
LOL
-- MWT ;)
-
There: no rule-book... [I missed a colon]
There's no rule-book... [I missed an apostrophe and an "s"]
There is no rule-book... [I missed the word "is"]
For Oswald not to be positively identified at the window from where shots were fired does not exonerate him of assassinating President John F. Kennedy.
Does not exonerate?? Sorry bud, he was never convicted. See the problem you have? Stasi comes to mind, they always knew better than everyone else, right?
One thing at a time, Oswald was not identified in the window, so don't try to sneak this "not to be positively identified" or do you mean you can show me a picture of Oswald "kind of identified" in the window? I would love to see what that looks like
Sorry bud, you don't know if shots were fired from the window either. Show a bullet moving in the Zapruder film before it makes contact with anyone or anything. Can you do that? Of course not, that sounds crazy.
Even crazier is someone with tainted evidence, a laughable chain of custody, then brush it all off as a human error. Lazy Lazy Lazy
-
It’s a question of when Oswald would have read the newspaper
If it is not until Thursday, then the reason is it’s risky to take a rifle in a package into Dealey plaza on Friday morning,let alone into some other building
On the other hand, if Oswald read the Tuesday paper then he had more than enough time to explore Dealey plaza, select some spot or building, and to carry a package with rifle. If William Castor could walk around carrying TWO rifles as well as EXHIBIT them without any DPD , FBI, or other security being alarmed, then surely Oswald could have probably done so with just ONE package
It would have been impossible to check every person who entered a building along the parade route. Imagine the resources to do that in every city the president visited? That would have entailed securing hundreds of large buildings and tens of thousands of people. An impossible task. They certainly wouldn't have done that days before the presidential motorcade when Caster brought his rifles. Assassinating the president entails risk. But getting the rifle into a building in which he worked wasn't that difficult. Oswald knew the movements and patterns of his coworkers, likely had a hiding spot and shooting location predetermined. That morning he goes straight up to the 6th floor and hides his rifle. My guess is that he hid it near where his clipboard was later found on the 6th floor. The last thing he did before picking up the rifle package was to put his clipboard down. He used his clipboard to give the appearance of doing work on the 6th floor in case he encountered anyone while he was lingering up there. Once the coast is clear he puts it down, picks up the rifle package, and makes his way to the SN. Frazier was likely his biggest concern. He would have known Oswald's movements were out of the ordinary that week, that he carried a long package to work, and that the presidential motorcade was passing the building that day. He had more pieces than anyone else but at that time it was unthinkable by most people that anyone would shoot the president.
-
It would have been impossible to check every person who entered a building along the parade route. Imagine the resources to do that in every city the president visited? That would have entailed securing hundreds of large buildings and tens of thousands of people. An impossible task. They certainly wouldn't have done that days before the presidential motorcade when Caster brought his rifles. Assassinating the president entails risk. But getting the rifle into a building in which he worked wasn't that difficult. Oswald knew the movements and patterns of his coworkers, likely had a hiding spot and shooting location predetermined. That morning he goes straight up to the 6th floor and hides his rifle. My guess is that he hid it near where his clipboard was later found on the 6th floor. The last thing he did before picking up the rifle package was to put his clipboard down. He used his clipboard to give the appearance of doing work on the 6th floor in case he encountered anyone while he was lingering up there. Once the coast is clear he puts it down, picks up the rifle package, and makes his way to the SN. Frazier was likely his biggest concern. He would have known Oswald's movements were out of the ordinary that week, that he carried a long package to work, and that the presidential motorcade was passing the building that day. He had more pieces than anyone else but at that time it was unthinkable by most people that anyone would shoot the president.
My guess is that he hid it near where his clipboard was later found on the 6th floor.
Indeed, your entire story is a guess
at that time it was unthinkable by most people that anyone would shoot the president.
Yeah right, after all there had only been assassination attempts on FDR in 1933, on Truman in 1947 and 1950 and Kennedy himself in 1960.
-
It would have been impossible to check every person who entered a building along the parade route. Imagine the resources to do that in every city the president visited? That would have entailed securing hundreds of large buildings and tens of thousands of people. An impossible task. They certainly wouldn't have done that days before the presidential motorcade when Caster brought his rifles. Assassinating the president entails risk. But getting the rifle into a building in which he worked wasn't that difficult. Oswald knew the movements and patterns of his coworkers, likely had a hiding spot and shooting location predetermined. That morning he goes straight up to the 6th floor and hides his rifle. My guess is that he hid it near where his clipboard was later found on the 6th floor. The last thing he did before picking up the rifle package was to put his clipboard down. He used his clipboard to give the appearance of doing work on the 6th floor in case he encountered anyone while he was lingering up there. Once the coast is clear he puts it down, picks up the rifle package, and makes his way to the SN. Frazier was likely his biggest concern. He would have known Oswald's movements were out of the ordinary that week, that he carried a long package to work, and that the presidential motorcade was passing the building that day. He had more pieces than anyone else but at that time it was unthinkable by most people that anyone would shoot the president.
Well said, as usual.
-
This has all been asked before. Everything has.
"I saw him do it'' witnesses were rounded up were they not? [even if they didn't see anything]..but phony ones were not required or even desirable.
Were they there to watch the parade or gaze at the windows? There was already enough 'evidence'.
"Paine saw the rifle"? She didn't because there was no rifle in her garage. If she said there was anyway..it would have raised too many more questions.
Marina had already told the cops that Oswald bore no animosity toward JFK...so she couldn't very well tell the Commission any differently.
Freeman,
Self-avowed Marxist Lee Harvey Oswald (or, indeed, Nikita Khrushchev and/or Fidel Castro) didn't have to bear any personal animosity towards JFK to kill him for ideological reasons, i.e., "to advance The Dialectic".
D'oh
-- MWT ;)
-
Self-avowed Marxist Lee Harvey Oswald (or, indeed, Nikita Khrushchev and/or Fidel Castro) didn't have to bear any personal animosity towards JFK to kill him for ideological reasons, i.e., "to advance The Dialectic".
So Fidel and/or Nikita sat Oswald down [sometime/somewhere/somehow] and told him to get a rifle and a job at the TSBD on the 1st of November because they happened to know that JFK would be riding by in a parade weeks later and when he does---shoot him like a good little Marxist-Manchurian candidate ...A better story [and more entertaining] than the Smith-Chapman ["Well said" attaboy pat pat] yarn above ........(http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/popcorn_eating.gif)
-
So Fidel and/or Nikita sat Oswald down [sometime/somewhere/somehow] and told him to get a rifle and a job at the TSBD on the 1st of November because they happened to know that JFK would be riding by in a parade weeks later and when he does---shoot him like a good little Marxist-Manchurian candidate ...A better story [and more entertaining] than the Smith-Chapman ["Well said" attaboy pat pat] yarn above ........(http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/popcorn_eating.gif)
told him to get a rifle and a job at the TSBD on the 1st of November because they happened to know that JFK would be riding by in a parade weeks later and when he does---shoot him like a good little Marxist-Manchurian candidate
I'd be embarrassed if I posted such an absurd idea....
-
I'd be embarrassed if I posted such an absurd idea....
You mean Tommy saying Khrushchev killed Kennedy? He has been for the last 10 years AFAIK But getting the rifle into a building in which he worked wasn't that difficult. Oswald knew the movements and patterns of his coworkers, likely had a hiding spot and shooting location predetermined. That morning he goes straight up to the 6th floor and hides his rifle. My guess is that he hid it near where his clipboard was later found on the 6th floor. The last thing he did before picking up the rifle package was to put his clipboard down. He used his clipboard to give the appearance of doing work on the 6th floor in case he encountered anyone while he was lingering up there. Once the coast is clear he puts it down, picks up the rifle package, and makes his way to the SN. Frazier was likely his biggest concern. He would have known Oswald's movements were out of the ordinary that week, that he carried a long package to work, and that the presidential motorcade was passing the building that day. He had more pieces than anyone else but at that time it was unthinkable by most people that anyone would shoot the president.
"my guess"....Admits it is all guesswork but such a novel has already been done.
Ever read "Portrait of the Assassin" ...Gerald R Ford ?? [Only Ford didn't really write it] It is a rather hysterical narrative written like Alice in Wonderland. It should be called.... Portrait of an Imaginary Derelict
-
Iacoletti,
Do you still think the three people on the Pergola Patio in Towner might be men, wearing Bermuda shorts to a presidential motorcade on a cool, blustery late November day in conservative 1963 Dallas, Texas?
And that one of the dudes is wearing ... gasp ... a light blue headscarf?
LOL
-- MWT ;)
Graves, get a life.
-
Oswald knew the movements and patterns of his coworkers, likely had a hiding spot and shooting location predetermined. That morning he goes straight up to the 6th floor and hides his rifle. My guess is that he hid it near where his clipboard was later found on the 6th floor. The last thing he did before picking up the rifle package was to put his clipboard down. He used his clipboard to give the appearance of doing work on the 6th floor in case he encountered anyone while he was lingering up there. Once the coast is clear he puts it down, picks up the rifle package, and makes his way to the SN.
There isn’t a scintilla of evidence to support a single word of this tall tale.
Even if you attach the word “likely” to it.
-
So Fidel and/or Nikita sat Oswald down [sometime/somewhere/somehow] and told him to get a rifle and a job at the TSBD on the 1st of November because they happened to know that JFK would be riding by in a parade weeks later and when he does---shoot him like a good little Marxist-Manchurian candidate ...A better story [and more entertaining] than the Smith-Chapman ["Well said" attaboy pat pat] yarn above ........(http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/popcorn_eating.gif)
Freeman,
Did I say Khrushchev and/or Castro controlled Oswald?
Nope.
What I said is that any one of those three guys, although (probably) liking Kennedy personally, were fully capable of killing him in order to speed up the "inevitable," "history-advancing" process of Dialectical Materialism.
D'oh
-- MWT ;)
-
This has all been asked before. Everything has.
"I saw him do it'' witnesses were rounded up were they not? [even if they didn't see anything]..but phony ones were not required or even desirable.
Were they there to watch the parade or gaze at the windows? There was already enough 'evidence'.
"Paine saw the rifle"? She didn't because there was no rifle in her garage. If she said there was anyway..it would have raised too many more questions.
Marina had already told the cops that Oswald bore no animosity toward JFK...so she couldn't very well tell the Commission any differently.
Sorry, you believe Paine and Marina et cetera, et cetera lied and were part of the conspiracy, correct? And they lied to frame Oswald, correct? And you believe the witnesses in the Tippit shooting all lied, correct?
But you don't believe they would lie about the rifle because there was no rifle? And "phony witnesses" were not required to identify Oswald in the sniper's nest?
Really? One of the biggest claims made by the "Oswald didn't do it" crowd is that nobody can place him in the window at the time of shooting. Planting phony witnesses in Dealey Plaza solves that.
Question: When did Marina tell the cops that Oswald bore no animosity towards JFK? I am not aware of that. And why didn't Ruth and Michael said he did? And you believe the DPD were part of the framing. So why didn't they just lie about what she said?
You folks believe all sorts of lies and falsehoods were done; evidence planted, witnesses coerced or planted. And yet these basic failures by the conspirators - to plant witnesses who said they saw Oswald shoot JFK or to coerce Jarman or Norman to say they saw him carry a large package - make no logical sense at all.
It only makes sense if there wasn't a conspiracy to frame Oswald.
-
Oswald didn't know the work routines of his co-workers? Where they went at lunch for example? Oswald knew that at lunch time he would have the floor to himself. Because the workers went downstairs to the "domino room" to eat lunch. And the evidence is they went down that day and he stayed on the sixth floor.
That is one piece of evidence to support Richard's claim.
This is the problem trying to reason with fanatical Oswald apologists. Reason and facts and logic don't work.
-
You folks believe all sorts of lies and falsehoods were done; evidence planted, witnesses coerced or planted. And yet these basic failures by the conspirators - to plant witnesses who said they saw Oswald shoot JFK or to coerce Jarman or Norman to say they saw him carry a large package - make no logical sense at all.
You folks believe that assumptions, conjecture, and psychobabble constitute evidence.
-
Oswald didn't know the work routines of his co-workers? Where they went at lunch for example? Oswald knew that at lunch time he would have the floor to himself. Because the workers went downstairs to the "domino room" to eat lunch. And the evidence is they went down that day and he stayed on the sixth floor.
You don’t know that he stayed on the sixth floor when they went to lunch, or even that he was on the sixth floor. That’s yet another assumption.
Shelley, Piper, and Givens (originally) placed Oswald on the first floor not long after the elevator race.
-
Reminder...The weather forecast that Friday was rain. Kennedy's car would have to use the bubble top.
Some of the folks here think....
That Oswald didn't care about that. He had 4 bullets to kill everybody.
The Dallas Police loved Kennedy very much... they would wish him no harm and protected him so well.
DA Henry Wade "" """ "" "" " " " " " "
Jane Edna Hoover "" " " " " " "
Hoover did not even attend the JFK funeral. When Kennedy was being buried she/he was in his office smoking a cigar--
---conducting business as usual 8)
FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover learned early on about the plan but did nothing to stop it. Hoover warned no one—not the Dallas police, not the Secret Service. His motives stemmed from a fervent hatred of Kennedy and fear that the President would eventually fire him. He is documented as a close confidant of Vice President Lyndon Johnson—a man Hoover "controlled" due to blackmail and scandals. Hoover’s day–to–day running of the FBI, his strange personality, and his backroom dealings are brought to life using an extensive collection of press clippings, government documents, and other original sources.
Act of Treason...Mark North
-
Oswald didn't know the work routines of his co-workers? Where they went at lunch for example? Oswald knew that at lunch time he would have the floor to himself. Because the workers went downstairs to the "domino room" to eat lunch. And the evidence is they went down that day and he stayed on the sixth floor.
That is one piece of evidence to support Richard's claim.
This is the problem trying to reason with fanatical Oswald apologists. Reason and facts and logic don't work.
Yes, using common sense and reason on these nuts is like trying to teach a chimp to speak French. A waste of time. If they were capable of that feat, they wouldn't be CTers to begin with. It's all the more amusing that these same nuts entertain all manner of wildly outlandish, baseless theories about average citizens Oswald encountered for which there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever but then dispute any logical inference relating to Oswald's actions. That would include his scouting a place in the building that gave him the best combination of a shooting location and seclusion to commit the act. Oswald would also have been aware of the general patterns and behaviors of his fellow employees including whether the 6th floor was generally deserted at lunch time. He had worked in the building for a month or so. When he selects the 6th floor as his shooting location, he decides where it is best to hide the rifle on that floor. And that would be where he goes with the rifle when he arrives that morning. Not rocket science. He is seen carrying his clipboard and the clipboard is found on the 6th floor. A logical inference is that he is trying to give the appearance of being busy with his clipboard to explain his presence on the floor just prior to the assassination. Once he decides it's a go, the last thing he does is place the clipboard down and retrieve his rifle. Thus, the location of the clipboard may provide an indication as to where he hid the rifle before the assassination. And its in the same general area where he hides it after the assassination. Suggesting that Oswald believes it to be a good hiding spot.
Only Oswald can know certain details of the crime. He was in the process of committing a crime and took measures to hide his activities in anticipation of that crime. We can, however, apply logic and common sense to the evidence to make certain logical inferences about his actions. But no one needs to prove with absolute certainty where Oswald hid the rifle or whether he had some trepidation about carrying it into the building to demonstrate his guilt. The presence of Oswald's rifle on the floor from which witnesses confirm there was a shooter along with fired bullet casings from his rifle make him the obvious suspect. His prints on the SN boxes and bag further implicate him. Absent any type of reasonable explanation as to how his rifle ended up there, his goose is cooked. Instead Oswald flees the building, gets a pistol, shoots a police officer, and lies to the police about not owning a rifle. His story about the bag also contradicts what Frazier tells the police (i.e. that he asked Oswald about his lunch and Oswald confirmed that he was not carrying his lunch on that day). All highly indicative of guilt. It is laughable that anyone can believe from these facts and circumstances that there is any doubt whatsoever of his guilt. A contrarian can dispute facts, evidence, common sense and logic to the end of time if they don't desire reaching any conclusion. It's just a lazy and dishonest way to create the false impression of doubt. Nothing in human history could ever be accepted as fact applying that type of alice-in-wonderland kookery to any situation. It's what a defense attorney does when they realize their client is guilty. An implicit acknowledgement of guilt.
-
Yes, using common sense and reason on these nuts is like trying to teach a chimp to speak French.
“Common sense and reason” is what “Richard” calls it when he makes up a narrative out of thin air.
logical inference relating to Oswald's actions. That would include his scouting a place in the building that gave him the best combination of a shooting location and seclusion to commit the act.
Case in point. There’s no evidence whatsoever that Oswald “scouted” the building.
Oswald would also have been aware of the general patterns and behaviors of his fellow employees
Baseless speculation. There’s no reason to assume that they had any “general patterns and behaviors” to be aware of, or that Oswald was in fact aware of any.
including whether the 6th floor was generally deserted at lunch time.
They didn’t “generally” lay flooring. In fact, it was less likely to be deserted this particular day than usual.
He had worked in the building for a month or so. When he selects the 6th floor as his shooting location,
Notice how “Richard” just slips in his conclusion as an assumption?
he decides where it is best to hide the rifle on that floor.
There’s no evidence that a rifle was hidden on that floor prior to the motorcade arriving.
And that would be where he goes with the rifle when he arrives that morning.
There’s no evidence Oswald went to the sixth floor when he arrived that morning. Or that he had a rifle.
Not rocket science.
Correct. It’s just self-serving made up BS.
He is seen carrying his clipboard and the clipboard is found on the 6th floor.
There’s also no way to know that the clipboard found by Frankie Kaiser 11 days later was used by Oswald on November 22. Kaiser wasn’t even at work that day.
Only Oswald can know certain details of the crime.
Again, assuming the conclusion. And why are you so dead set on making up details that cannot be known?
But no one needs to prove with absolute certainty where Oswald hid the rifle or whether he had some trepidation about carrying it into the building to demonstrate his guilt.
You haven’t even proven that he brought a rifle into the building.
The presence of Oswald's rifle
LOL
on the floor from which witnesses confirm there was a shooter
No witnesses saw any shooting.
along with fired bullet casings from his rifle make him the obvious suspect.
Suspect to your heart’s content. Just don’t pretend you’ve proven anything.
His prints on the SN boxes and bag further implicate him.
Implicate him for what? Touching book boxes that it was his job to get books out of? Or touching a bag that you can’t demonstrate ever contained a rifle?
Absent any type of reasonable explanation as to how his rifle ended up there, his goose is cooked.
Guilty until proven innocent. “Reasonable” to you means the thing you already believe.
Instead Oswald flees the building, gets a pistol, shoots a police officer, and lies to the police about not owning a rifle.
Again, these are all claims based on biased assumptions (Oops, I mean “common sense”), not evidence.
His story about the bag also contradicts what Frazier tells the police (i.e. that he asked Oswald about his lunch and Oswald confirmed that he was not carrying his lunch on that day). All highly indicative of guilt.
All that’s highly indicative of is that his (alleged) story contradicts Frazier. Frazier’s story over the years also contradicts Frazier’s story.
It is laughable that anyone can believe from these facts and circumstances that there is any doubt whatsoever of his guilt.
It’s laughable that you think your subjective opinions are evidence.
A contrarian can dispute facts, evidence, common sense and logic to the end of time if they don't desire reaching any conclusion.
You act like reaching a conclusion is in-and-of-itself a virtue. Even if you have to make things up to reach it.
It's just a lazy and dishonest way to create the false impression of doubt.
Just because you have no doubt doesn’t mean there is no reasonable doubt. It’s not all about you.
Nothing in human history could ever be accepted as fact applying that type of alice-in-wonderland kookery to any situation. It's what a defense attorney does when they realize their client is guilty. An implicit acknowledgement of guilt.
What you are doing is what a corrupt prosecutor does when there is a foregone conclusion. Everything points to guilt.
“I am not a witch”
“Only a true witch will deny being a witch!”
“All right then, I’m a witch”
“She’s a witch — she admitted it!”
-
A waste of time.
And yet here he is...wasting more time---trolling away :D
-
It’s a question of when Oswald would have read the newspaper
If it is not until Thursday, then the reason is it’s risky to take a rifle in a package into Dealey plaza on Friday morning,let alone into some other building
On the other hand, if Oswald read the Tuesday paper then he had more than enough time to explore Dealey plaza, select some spot or building, and to carry a package with rifle. If William Castor could walk around carrying TWO rifles as well as EXHIBIT them without any DPD , FBI, or other security being alarmed, then surely Oswald could have probably done so with just ONE package
---------------------------------------------------
From the Keep it Simple Sherlock Department
----------------------------------------------------
As long as Lee Harvey Occam-Oswald heard about the route of the motorcade before Frazier left work that Thursday, the little prick had a shot at becoming a somebody.
-
It’s a question of when Oswald would have read the newspaper
If it is not until Thursday, then the reason is it’s risky to take a rifle in a package into Dealey plaza on Friday morning,let alone into some other building
On the other hand, if Oswald read the Tuesday paper then he had more than enough time to explore Dealey plaza, select some spot or building, and to carry a package with rifle. If William Castor could walk around carrying TWO rifles as well as EXHIBIT them without any DPD , FBI, or other security being alarmed, then surely Oswald could have probably done so with just ONE package
It’s a question of when Oswald would have read the newspaper
Oswald did not buy newspapers. He read the discarded newspapers when they were a day old. This suggests that Oswald read about the President's motorcade route on Wednesday 20 November 1963--a day after it was first published in the Dallas newspapers.
If it is not until Thursday, then the reason is it’s risky to take a rifle in a package into Dealey plaza on Friday morning,let alone into some other building
A confusing sentence. Even so: It's not risky for Lee Oswald to take a rifle (disassembled) into the TSBD on the morning of the day that the President will pass the building in which he (Oswald) works. If law-enforcement had searched workers entering the TSBD, Oswald had an excuse for bringing his rifle to work. The disassembled state of the gun would support a story that he was taking it to a gunsmith (later in the day) to have the rifle repaired.
-
“Common sense and reason” is what “Richard” calls it when he makes up a narrative out of thin air.
Case in point. There’s no evidence whatsoever that Oswald “scouted” the building.
Baseless speculation. There’s no reason to assume that they had any “general patterns and behaviors” to be aware of, or that Oswald was in fact aware of any.
They didn’t “generally” lay flooring. In fact, it was less likely to be deserted this particular day than usual.
Notice how “Richard” just slips in his conclusion as an assumption?
There’s no evidence that a rifle was hidden on that floor prior to the motorcade arriving.
There’s no evidence Oswald went to the sixth floor when he arrived that morning. Or that he had a rifle.
Correct. It’s just self-serving made up BS.
There’s also no way to know that the clipboard found by Frankie Kaiser 11 days later was used by Oswald on November 22. Kaiser wasn’t even at work that day.
Again, assuming the conclusion. And why are you so dead set on making up details that cannot be known?
You haven’t even proven that he brought a rifle into the building.
LOL
No witnesses saw any shooting.
Suspect to your heart’s content. Just don’t pretend you’ve proven anything.
Implicate him for what? Touching book boxes that it was his job to get books out of? Or touching a bag that you can’t demonstrate ever contained a rifle?
Guilty until proven innocent. “Reasonable” to you means the thing you already believe.
Again, these are all claims based on biased assumptions (Oops, I mean “common sense”), not evidence.
All that’s highly indicative of is that his (alleged) story contradicts Frazier. Frazier’s story over the years also contradicts Frazier’s story.
It’s laughable that you think your subjective opinions are evidence.
You act like reaching a conclusion is in-and-of-itself a virtue. Even if you have to make things up to reach it.
Just because you have no doubt doesn’t mean there is no reasonable doubt. It’s not all about you.
What you are doing is what a corrupt prosecutor does when there is a foregone conclusion. Everything points to guilt.
“I am not a witch”
“Only a true witch will deny being a witch!”
“All right then, I’m a witch”
“She’s a witch — she admitted it!”
There’s no evidence that a rifle was hidden on that floor prior to the motorcade arriving.
Actually the manner in which the rifle was found IS evidence that the Carcano was hidden BEFORE the motorcade arrived....
The two officers who spotted the rifle ( Boone and Weitzman) said that the rifle was ON THE FLOOR beneath a pallet.... Seymour Weitzman said that he was down on the floor shining his flashlight beneath the pallet when he spotted the rifle lying on the floor
The rifle could NOT have been hidden in that manner AFTER the shooting.....Because, Baker and Truly arrived on the sixth floor about two minutes after the FIRST shot was fired. Baker and Truly would have seen anybody hiding the rifle....
-
There’s no evidence that a rifle was hidden on that floor prior to the motorcade arriving.
Actually the manner in which the rifle was found IS evidence that the Carcano was hidden BEFORE the motorcade arrived....
The Tw officers who spotted the rifle ( Boone and Weitzman) said that the rifle was ON THE FLOOR beneath a pallet.... Seymour Weitzman said that he was down on the floor shining his flashlight beneath the pallet when he spotted the rifle lying on the floor
The rifle could NOT have been hidden in that manner AFTER the shooting.....Because, Baker and Truly arrived on the sixth floor about two minutes after the FIRST shot was fired. Baker and Truly would have seen anybody hiding the rifle....
The rifle could NOT have been hidden in that manner AFTER the shooting.....Because, Baker and Truly arrived on the sixth floor about two minutes after the FIRST shot was fired.
Baker and Truly encountered Oswald in the second floor lunchroom approximately 90 seconds after the FIRST shot was fired at President Kennedy. Some time was consumed in the encounter. It would be impossible for them to ascend four (4) floors in thirty (30) seconds.
Baker and Truly would have seen anybody hiding the rifle....
Temporarily setting aside the timing problem: The assassin (Oswald or the 6th floor shooter) would have left the 6th floor already and not be there in the process of hiding the murder weapon. Perhaps you could explain your theory with some facts?
-
The rifle could NOT have been hidden in that manner AFTER the shooting.....Because, Baker and Truly arrived on the sixth floor about two minutes after the FIRST shot was fired.
Baker and Truly encountered Oswald in the second floor lunchroom approximately 90 seconds after the FIRST shot was fired at President Kennedy. Some time was consumed in the encounter. It would be impossible for them to ascend four (4) floors in thirty (30) seconds.
Baker and Truly would have seen anybody hiding the rifle....
Temporarily setting aside the timing problem: The assassin (Oswald or the 6th floor shooter) would have left the 6th floor already and not be there in the process of hiding the murder weapon. Perhaps you could explain your theory with some facts?
I never imagined that a dumbass would attempt to refute the evidence.....
Mr Lidell says that it would have been impossible "It would be impossible for them to ascend four (4) floors in thirty (30) seconds."... Mr Lidell apparently has a reading comprehension problem....and didn't understand the word "ABOUT" preceding the words TWO MINUTES.... Nobody knows exactly when Baker and Truly arrived on the sixth floor but LBJ's cover up committee claimed that Baker left Lee Oswald on the second floor about 90 seconds after the shots were fired. So who knows exactly when Baker arrived on the sixth floor ??? I would concede that it's improbable that Baker could have arrived on the sixth floor thirty seconds after leaving Lee on the second floor....But that's not the point.... The point is:....The rifle was well hidden beneath a pallet with boxes of books stacked on it....Nobody could have hidden the rifle in the manner it was hidden after the shooting and before Baker arrived on the sixth floor.
-
Nobody could have hidden the rifle in the manner it was hidden after the shooting and before Baker arrived on the sixth floor.
Why would it necessarily have to have been put there before Baker arrived on the sixth floor?
-
There’s no evidence that a rifle was hidden on that floor prior to the motorcade arriving.
Actually the manner in which the rifle was found IS evidence that the Carcano was hidden BEFORE the motorcade arrived....
The two officers who spotted the rifle ( Boone and Weitzman) said that the rifle was ON THE FLOOR beneath a pallet.... Seymour Weitzman said that he was down on the floor shining his flashlight beneath the pallet when he spotted the rifle lying on the floor
The rifle could NOT have been hidden in that manner AFTER the shooting.....Because, Baker and Truly arrived on the sixth floor about two minutes after the FIRST shot was fired. Baker and Truly would have seen anybody hiding the rifle....
Silly and false. It would have taken Oswald only a matter of seconds to cross the floor and place the rifle where it was found. He had time to do that. Nothing you have claimed lends itself to the contrary much less proves that it could not have been done. What difference does it make regarding the timeline that the rifle was found ON THE FLOOR? LOL. The WC reenactment confirmed it took about one minute and 15 seconds to walk from the 6th floor window, pause to hide the rifle, and walk to the 2nd floor lunchroom. Baker also wasn't on the 6th floor at two minutes after the first shot.
-
Silly and false. It would have taken Oswald only a matter of seconds to cross the floor and place the rifle where it was found. He had time to do that. Nothing you have claimed lends itself to the contrary much less proves that it could not have been done. What difference does it make regarding the timeline that the rifle was found ON THE FLOOR? LOL. The WC reenactment confirmed it took about one minute and 15 seconds to walk from the 6th floor window, pause to hide the rifle, and walk to the 2nd floor lunchroom. Baker also wasn't on the 6th floor at two minutes after the first shot.
Yes Mr Smith, evidentiary valuable indicative information, supported by re-enactment, reliably indicates that DPD Officer ML Baker and Bldg Superintendent RS Truly would still be on, and/or leaving, the 2nd floor at about 2 minutes post shots.
-
Ever notice that Richard Smith writes "LOL" in all his posts? Is everything really all that funny?
-
Ever notice that Richard Smith writes "LOL" in all his posts? Is everything really all that funny?
Another valuable contribution. LOL.
-
Why would it necessarily have to have been put there before Baker arrived on the sixth floor?
Do you believe someone could have hidden the rifle beneath that pallet where Seymour Weitzman spotted it with hid flashlight, AFTER the shooting??
-
The WC reenactment confirmed it took about one minute and 15 seconds to walk from the 6th floor window, pause to hide the rifle, and walk to the 2nd floor lunchroom.
“Confirmed”. LOL.
The WC “reenactment” was contrived to give them the answer they were looking for.
-
Do you believe someone could have hidden the rifle beneath that pallet where Seymour Weitzman spotted it with hid flashlight, AFTER the shooting??
I don’t see why not. How long was the sixth floor unoccupied after the shooting?
-
... to speed up the inevitable history-advancing process of Dialectical Materialism.
I had to look that one up...
You must have smoked some good stuff there ::)
-
Sorry, you believe Paine and Marina et cetera, et cetera lied and were part of the conspiracy, correct? And they lied to frame Oswald, correct? And you believe the witnesses in the Tippit shooting all lied, correct?
But you don't believe they would lie about the rifle because there was no rifle? And "phony witnesses" were not required to identify Oswald in the sniper's nest?
Really? One of the biggest claims made by the "Oswald didn't do it" crowd is that nobody can place him in the window at the time of shooting. Planting phony witnesses in Dealey Plaza solves that.
Question: When did Marina tell the cops that Oswald bore no animosity towards JFK? I am not aware of that. And why didn't Ruth and Michael said he did? And you believe the DPD were part of the framing. So why didn't they just lie about what she said?
You folks believe all sorts of lies and falsehoods were done; evidence planted, witnesses coerced or planted. And yet these basic failures by the conspirators - to plant witnesses who said they saw Oswald shoot JFK or to coerce Jarman or Norman to say they saw him carry a large package - make no logical sense at all.
It only makes sense if there wasn't a conspiracy to frame Oswald.
Question: When did Marina tell the cops that Oswald bore no animosity towards JFK? I am not aware of that.
I believe she told the police that she was not AWARE of any animosity.
She insists Oswald was set up as “a patsy” to take the fall for plotters in the CIA and the Mafia, believes her own phones are still tapped by the Secret Service and has lived in fear of being assassinated by spooks herself. “Marina certainly doesn’t believe the official story. She always told me Lee Harvey Oswald loved President Kennedy” reveals one of her closest friends, documentary film maker Keya Morgan.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/lee-harvey-oswalds-widow-marina-2667002
Everybody lies to cover their backside.
Sorry, you believe Paine and Marina et cetera, et cetera lied and were part of the conspiracy, correct? And they lied to frame Oswald, correct? And you believe the witnesses in the Tippit shooting all lied, correct?
Pull the straw out...Nowhere did I say that they were part of a conspiracy...Everybody lies to cover their backside.
Just because they lied--doesn't mean they are conspirators...Get it?
-
I had to look that one up...
You must have smoked some good stuff there ::)
Freeman,
Rest assured that "poor, poor, poor, manipulated and ... gasp ... 'patsied'" Lee Harvey Oswald knew what the hell I'm talking about, for the simple reason that he was more truly Marxist than Nikita Effing Khrushchev, himself!
-- MWT ;)
PS Ever heard of Hegel? (Hint: He's the philosopher who turned Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels onto the concept of The Dialectical.)
D'oh
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Wilhelm_Friedrich_Hegel
-
What a stupid name for a topic anyway...What was Caprio thinking?
-
Rest assured that "poor, poor, poor, manipulated and ... gasp ... 'patsied'" Lee Harvey Oswald knew what the hell I'm talking about, for the simple reason that he was more truly Marxist than Nikita Effing Khrushchev, himself!
Dear Thomas...[remember when you used to write real nice like that?] How is it that the Oswald who wrote this 5th grade drivel...
(https://www.historyforsale.com/productimages/jpeg/285214.jpg)
...Was the same Lee Oswald that expounded and nailed this radio debate?---
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0330b.htm
-
Dear Thomas...[remember when you used to write real nice like that?] How is it that the Oswald who wrote this 5th grade drivel...
(https://www.historyforsale.com/productimages/jpeg/285214.jpg)
...Was the same Lee Oswald that expounded and nailed this radio debate?---
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0330b.htm
Freeman,
Point being?
-- MWT ;)
PS Do you see any mistakes in his syntax, grammar or vocabulary?
Did you know that Oswald spoke better English than most college graduates, and that the same could be said of what he wrote, if, that is, one disregards his numerous spelling errors?
Have you ever heard of the grammar rule "The gerund takes the possessive"?
Do you even know what a gerund is, Freeman?
LOL
Oswald evidently did.
-
Point being? Have you ever heard of the grammar rule "The gerund takes the possessive"? Do you even know what a gerund is, Freeman?
And the point being....?
-
Dear Thomas...[remember when you used to write real nice like that?] How is it that the Oswald who wrote this 5th grade drivel...
(https://www.historyforsale.com/productimages/jpeg/285214.jpg)
...Was the same Lee Oswald that expounded and nailed this radio debate?---
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0330b.htm
It may seem like "5th grade drivel" but if you open your eyes a little wider you may be able to discern information mixed in with the drivel that was probably of interest to Lee's handlers. For example ....It would be helpful in investigating Marina, to know that Marina was formerly known as Marina Prusakova ......But his mother probably could not have cared less...... And she certainly couldn't have cared less if Marina's Uncle was an officer in the Russian Army and would have wanted his address in Minsk.... But American intelligence who read the letter were happy to receive that information.
-
It may seem like "5th grade drivel" but if you open your eyes a little wider you may be able to discern information mixed in with the drivel that was probably of interest to Lee's handlers. For example ....It would be helpful in investigating Marina, to know that Marina was formerly known as Marina Prusakova ......But his mother probably could not have cared less...... And she certainly couldn't have cared less if Marina's Uncle was an officer in the Russian Army and would have wanted his address in Minsk.... But American intelligence who read the letter were happy to receive that information.
Walter,
Why, then, did Oswald describe Marina's uncle as an "army colonel," instead of as a colonel in the MVD?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Internal_Affairs_(Russia)
-- MWT ;)
-
Walter,
Why, then, did Oswald describe Marina's uncle as an "army colonel," instead of as a colonel in the MVD?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Internal_Affairs_(Russia)
-- MWT ;)
Why, then, did Oswald describe Marina's uncle as an "army colonel," instead of as a colonel in the MVD?
Pssst..... Mr Naive, if Lee had told his "mother" that Colonel Prusakova was in the MVD, it undoubtedly would have stirred the interest of the Russian censors, but by merely referring to Marina's uncle as an army colonel it probably didn't raise much interest.
-
Why, then, did Oswald describe Marina's uncle as an "army colonel," instead of as a colonel in the MVD?
Pssst..... Mr Naive, if Lee had told his "mother" that Colonel Prusakova was in the MVD, it undoubtedly would have stirred the interest of the Russian censors, but by merely referring to Marina's uncle as an army colonel it probably didn't raise much interest.
Oh, I see.
Well, Lee did fancy himself a triple-agent, or as leading three-lives or some-such thing from time-to-time, iirc.
LOL
-- MWT ;)
PS And what do you suppose the evil, evil, evil CIA did with that juicy bit of "intel"?
-
an LN has agreed more or less with my previous suggestion that Oswald could have carried a rifle in a carton box package around in Dealey Plaza and not arouse suspicion, given that William Castor did just that on Wed Nov 20/63
and since it is reasonably probable that Oswald could have been informed by Tuesday of the JFK motorcade route from overhearing discussion of such from those who DID read the Tues paper
And since Oswald DID have enough money to use a Taxi
Then Oswald could have taken Taxi on his Tuesday lunch hour to get his rifle wrapped up in blanket and return to Dealey Plaza and carry it to some other place from whence he would only need ONE shot to kill a stationary JFK making a speech
-
Why, then, did Oswald describe Marina's uncle as an "army colonel," instead of as a colonel in the MVD? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Internal_Affairs_(Russia)
Thomas....The Vityaz [MVD] was army. Your link didn't link very well. Look up Vityaz.
-
Thomas....The Vityaz [MVD] was army. Your link didn't link very well. Look up Vityaz.
Google: ussr mvd
-- MWT Walk:
-
Oh, I see.
Well, Lee did fancy himself a triple-agent, or as leading three-lives or some-such thing from time-to-time, iirc.
LOL
-- MWT ;)
PS And what do you suppose the evil, evil, evil CIA did with that juicy bit of "intel"?
Lee did fancy himself a triple-agent, or as leading three-lives or some-such thing from time-to-time,
Yes, In fact, he did, ... Since you know that why don't you keep that in mind . We know that the US was engaged in a false defector program involving young military men whom the government had carefully screened before training them to operate as neophyte intel agents ( nothing big was expected from them ) but it was a way of getting agents behind the iron curtain and hoping that they would act when ordered( not Unlike the Manchurian candidate ) For Example.... Lee was supposed to turn on his electric razor at a designated time that would be broadcast over Voice of America. Lee had no idea that his razor emitted a very unique electronic radio signal that had been recorded and encoded into the guidance system on FG Powers U-2. As it turned out...Lee never received the message from VOA because Power's U-2 was shot down before it got in range of Lee's secret radio.
-
Lee did fancy himself a triple-agent, or as leading three-lives or some-such thing from time-to-time,
Yes, In fact, he did, ... Since you know that why don't you keep that in mind . We know that the US was engaged in a false defector program involving you military men whom the government had carefully screened before training them to operate as neophyte intel agents ( nothing big was expected from them ) but it was a way of getting agents behind the iron curtain and hoping that they would act when ordered( not Unlike the Manchurian candidate ) For Example.... Lee was supposed to turn on his electric razor at a designated time that would be broadcast over Voice of America. Lee had no idea that his razor emitted a very unique electronic radio signal that had been recorded and encoded into the guidance system on FG Powers U-2. As it turned out...Lee never recived the message from VOA because Power's U-2 was shot down before it got in range of Lee's secret radio.
"Walt",
I see.
And did evil, evil, evil James Angleton send him to Moscow to enable those nice Russians to shoot down Gary Powers so that the negotiations in Vienna would be scuttled and the evil, evil, evil "MIICC" could continue to make boo-coo filthy, filthy lucre and to commit mass murder on millions of innocent Third World women and children and to pollute the bejezus out of Gaia Mother Earth, too?
-- MWT ;)
PS What Oswald do with all of the money the evil, evil, evil CIA or the equally evil ONI must have paid him for his daring services?
Salt it away in a Swiss bank account for Jason Bourne?